CSS 2021 CA Mag (Vol-I) by Aamir Mahar PDF

wwww.CSSExamPoint.
com __________________________________________________________
1
For annual subscription of Biweekly Current Affairs
Explainer for CSS 2021 Candidates, whatsapp at
923030308056. Thanks!
Current Affairs Magazine for CSS 2021 Student (Aamir Mahar)
“It is my dream that we would create a Hindustan of the Hindus. Maharashtrians or

Punjabis alone cannot fight against Islam. That is why, I appeal to all Hindus to break
the linguistic wall around them and come together so that we can bring Islam in this
country down to its knees.” –Former Shiv Sena supremo Bal Thackeray
Modi’ BJP has won an outsized mandate in 2019 elections as the people
has re-elected BJP. Bharatiya Janata party (BJP) was founded on 6 April
1980. In its 39 years of age, the party has a story of its own. From just two
seats in Lok Sabha in 1984 to winning the second term in the elections that
were held this year, the party has inflicted a crushing defeat on the Indian
National Congress (INC). Arundhati Roy dissects the rise of BJP by
looking deep into the foundation of Rashtriya Swayam Sevak Sangh (RSS)
and its creation of literature that promoted Hindu nationalism.
Nevertheless the credit does goes only to RSS. The abysmal performance
of INC all these years also made it easier for BJP to reoccupy the treasury
benches with Modi as the Prime Minister (PM) of India. The ideology of
BJP can create fissures in the political stability of India. The Hindu
vigilantes loathe every thing that is not Hindu. Muslims, Dalits, Christians,
leftists, academics and journalists who dissent against the BJP are now
vulnerable to persecution in the hands of the followers of Hindu ideology.
BJP will be making similar mistakes in the present that INC made in
Indian Subcontinent while refusing to protect the interests of minorities
that resulted in partition of the Subcontinent. Is BJP up for another
partition of India? Its policies show that it is.
wwww.CSSExamPoint.com __________________________________________________________
2
Current Affairs Magazine

for CSS 2021 Students
Volume -I
by
Aamir Mahar
www.CSSExamPoint.com
3
INSIDE -
1) How a World Order Ends? (Richard Haass)
2) A New Americanism (Jill Lepore)
3) The Longest Wars (George Packer)
4) The Self-Destruction of American Power (Fareed Zakaria)
5) Putin, the Great (Susan B. Glasser)
6) Trump’s Assault on the Global Trading System (Chad P. Bown & Douglas A.)
7) The Sources of Chinese Conduct (Odd Arne Westad)
8) War Is Not Over (Tanisha M. Fazal & Paul Poast)
9) Warnings From Versailles (Margaret MacMillan)
10) What a military intervention in Venezuela would look like? (Frank O. Mora)
11) The United States Should Fear a Faltering China (Michael Beckley)
12) Asean’s mid-life crisis in an Age of Geostrategic Flux
13) The Post-INF Treaty Crisis: Background and Next Steps
14) The crisis of democracy (Tahir Kamran)
15) Pakistan’s Changing Geopolitics (Dr Naazir Mahmood)
16) How to revive SAARC? (Fateh-ul-Mulk Ali Nasir)
17) The failure of institutions in Pakistan (Rabia Ahmed)
18) Why Geopolitics Matters? (Jeremy Black)
19) Is imperial geopolitics coming back? (Tarik Oguzlu)
20) Global Power dynamics and Pakistan’s foreign policy (Abdul Samad Khan)
21) Tragedy of Pakistani State, Society & Democracy (Jahangir Kakar)
22) Making CPEC Work: Nexus Between Pakistan & China (Ikram Sehgal)
23) Future of transatlantic relations and NATO (Tariq Oguzlu)
24) International law - The 'Deal of the Century' case (Ferhat Kucuk)
25) USA – Afghan deal vs Pak trial in FATF (Rehman Malik)
26) Pakistan’s unconditional diplomacy (Reema Shaukat)
27) Food inflation - what is driving it? (Dr Kamal Monnoo)
28) Trump, Modi and the Indo-Pacific (Adeela Naureen & Umar Waqar)
29) South Asia: What lies within and beyond. (Naghmana Shahid & Seher Kamran)
30) Pakistan’s impressive refugee (Atle Hetland)
31) FTO - a symbol of good governance (Muhammad Ashraf)
32) Toying with nuclear stability (Samson Simon)
33) Pakistan’s Foreign Policy Formation (Atle Hetland)
34) Child Abuse and deterrent punishment (Usman Hameed)
35) Afghanistan: Light at the end of tunnel? (Javid Husain)
36) Modernising the Muslim world (Shahid Javed Burki)
4
How a World Order Ends? by Richard Haass

A stable world order is a rare thing. When one does arise, revolutionary movements never again threatened their
it tends to come after a great convulsion that creates monarchies. The victorious powers also made the wise
both the conditions and the desire for something new. It choice to integrate a defeated France, a course very
requires a stable distribution of power and broad different from the one taken with Germany following
acceptance of the rules that govern the conduct of World War I and somewhat different from the one
international relations. It also needs skillful statecraft, chosen with Russia in the wake of the Cold War. The
since an order is made, not born. And no matter how congress yielded a system known as the Concert of
ripe the starting conditions or strong the initial desire, Europe. Although centered in Europe, it constituted the
maintaining it demands creative diplomacy, functioning international order of its day given the dominant
institutions, and effective action to adjust it when position of Europe and Europeans in the world. There
circumstances change and buttress it when challenges was a set of shared understandings about relations
come. Eventually, inevitably, even the best-managed between states, above all an agreement to rule out
order comes to an end. The balance of power invasion of another country or involvement in the
underpinning it becomes imbalanced. The institutions internal affairs of another without its permission. A
supporting it fail to adapt to new conditions. Some rough military balance dissuaded any state tempted to
countries fall, and others rise, the result of changing overthrow the order from trying in the first place (and
capacities, faltering wills, and growing ambitions. Those prevented any state that did try from succeeding).
responsible for upholding the order make mistakes both Foreign ministers met (at what came to be called
in what they choose to do and in what they choose not to “congresses”) whenever a major issue arose. The concert
do. But if the end of every order is inevitable, the timing was conservative in every sense of the word. The Treaty
and the manner of its ending are not. Nor is what comes of Vienna had made numerous territorial adjustments
in its wake. Orders tend to expire in a prolonged and then locked Europe’s borders into place, allowing
deterioration rather than a sudden collapse. And just as changes only if all signatories agreed. It also did what it
maintaining the order depends on effective statecraft could to back monarchies and encourage others to come
and effective action, good policy and proactive to their aid (as France did in Spain in 1823) when they
diplomacy can help determine how that deterioration were threatened by popular revolt. The concert worked
unfolds and what it brings. Yet for that to happen, not because there was complete agreement among the
something else must come first: recognition that the old great powers on every point but because each state had
order is never coming back and that efforts to resurrect its own reasons for supporting the overall system.
it will be in vain. As with any ending, acceptance must Austria was most concerned with resisting the forces of
come before one can move on. In the search for parallels liberalism, which threatened the ruling monarchy. The
to today’s world, scholars and practitioners have looked United Kingdom was focused on staving off a renewed
as far afield as ancient Greece, where the rise of a new challenge from France while also guarding against a
power resulted in war between Athens and Sparta, and potential threat from Russia (which meant not
the period after World War I, when an isolationist weakening France so much that it couldn’t help offset
United States and much of Europe sat on their hands as the threat from Russia). But there was enough overlap
Germany and Japan ignored agreements and invaded in interests and consensus on first-order questions that
their neighbors. But the more illuminating parallel to the concert prevented war between the major powers of
the present is the Concert of Europe in the nineteenth the day. The concert technically lasted a century, until
century, the most important and successful effort to the eve of World War I. But it had ceased to play a
build and sustain world order until our own time. From meaningful role long before then. The revolutionary
1815 until the outbreak of World War I a century later, waves that swept Europe in 1830 and 1848 revealed the
the order established at the Congress of Vienna defined limits of what members would do to maintain the
many international relationships and set (even if it often existing order within states in the face of public pressure.
failed to enforce) basic rules for international conduct. Then, more consequentially, came the Crimean War.
It provides a model of how to collectively manage Ostensibly fought over the fate of Christians living
security in a multipolar world. That order’s demise and within the Ottoman Empire, in actuality it was much
what followed offer instructive lessons for today—and more about who would control territory as that empire
an urgent warning. Just because an order is in decayed. The conflict pitted France, the United
irreversible decline does not mean that chaos or Kingdom, and the Ottoman Empire against Russia. It
calamity is inevitable. But if the deterioration is lasted two and a half years, from 1853 to 1856. It was a
managed poorly, catastrophe could well follow. costly war that highlighted the limits of the concert’s
ability to prevent great-power war; the great-power
OUT OF THE ASHES
comity that had made the concert possible no longer
The global order of the second half of the twentieth
existed. Subsequent wars between Austria and Prussia
century and the first part of the twenty-first grew out of
and Prussia and France demonstrated that major-power
the wreckage of two world wars. The nineteenth century
conflict had returned to the heart of Europe after a long
order followed an earlier international convulsion: the
hiatus. Matters seemed to stabilize for a time after that,
Napoleonic Wars, which, after the French Revolution
but this was an illusion. Beneath the surface, German
and the rise of Napoleon Bonaparte, ravaged Europe for
power was rising and empires were rotting. The
more than a decade. After defeating Napoleon and his
combination set the stage for World War I and the end
armies, the victorious allies—Austria, Prussia, Russia,
of what had been the concert.
and the United Kingdom, the great powers of their
day—came together in Vienna in 1814 and 1815. At the WHAT AILS THE ORDER?
Congress of Vienna, they set out to ensure that France’s What lessons can be drawn from this history? As much
military never again threatened their states and that as anything else, the rise and fall of major powers
5
determines the viability of the prevailing order, since nuclear deterrence. The two sides showed a degree of
changes in economic strength, political cohesion, and restraint in their rivalry. “Rollback”—Cold War parlance
military power shape what states can and are willing to for what today is called “regime change”—was rejected
do beyond their borders. Over the second half of the as both infeasible and reckless. Both sides followed
nineteenth century and the start of the twentieth, a informal rules of the road that included a healthy
powerful, unified Germany and a modern Japan rose, respect for each other’s backyards and allies. Ultimately,
the Ottoman Empire and tsarist Russia declined, and they reached an understanding over the political order
France and the United Kingdom grew stronger but not within Europe, the principal arena of Cold War
strong enough. Those changes upended the balance of competition, and in 1975 codified that mutual
power that had been the concert’s foundation; Germany, understanding in the Helsinki Accords. Even in a
in particular, came to view the status quo as divided world, the two power centers agreed on how the
inconsistent with its interests. Changes in the competition would be waged; theirs was an order based
technological and political context also affected that on means rather than ends. That there were only two
underlying balance. Under the concert, popular power centers made reaching such an agreement easier.
demands for democratic participation and surges of The other post–World War II order was the liberal
nationalism threatened the status quo within countries, order that operated alongside the Cold War order.
while new forms of transportation, communication, and Democracies were the main participants in this effort,
armaments transformed politics, economics, and which used aid and trade to strengthen ties and fostered
warfare. The conditions that helped give rise to the respect for the rule of law both within and between
concert were gradually undone. countries. The economic dimension of this order was
designed to bring about a world (or, more accurately,
Because orders tend to end with a whimper rather than
the non-communist half of it) defined by trade,
a bang, the process of deterioration is often not evident
development, and well-functioning monetary operations.
to decision-makers until it has advanced considerably.
Free trade would be an engine of economic growth and
Yet it would be overly deterministic to attribute history
bind countries together so that war would be deemed
to underlying conditions alone. Statecraft still matters.
too costly to wage; the dollar was accepted as the de
That the concert came into existence and lasted as long
facto global currency. The diplomatic dimension of the
as it did underscores that people make a difference. The
order gave prominence to the UN. The idea was that a
diplomats who crafted it—Metternich of Austria,
standing global forum could prevent or resolve
Talleyrand of France, Castlereagh of the United
international disputes. The UN Security Council, with
Kingdom—were exceptional. The fact that the concert
five great-power permanent members and additional
preserved peace despite the gap between two relatively
seats for a rotating membership, would orchestrate
liberal countries, France and the United Kingdom, and
international relations. Yet the order depended just as
their more conservative partners shows that countries
much on the willingness of the non-communist world
with different political systems and preferences can
(and U.S. allies in particular) to accept American
work together to maintain international order. Little
primacy. As it turns out, they were prepared to do this,
that turns out to be good or bad in history is inevitable.
as the United States was more often than not viewed as
The Crimean War might well have been avoided if more
a relatively benign hegemon, one admired as much for
capable and careful leaders had been on the scene. It is
what it was at home as for what it did abroad. Both of
far from clear that Russian actions warranted a military
these orders served the interests of the United States.
response by France and the United Kingdom of the
The core peace was maintained in both Europe and Asia
nature and on the scale that took place. That the
at a price that a growing U.S. economy could easily
countries did what they did also underscores the power
afford. Increased international trade and opportunities
and dangers of nationalism. World War I broke out in
for investment contributed to U.S. economic growth.
no small part because the successors to German
Over time, more countries joined the ranks of the
Chancellor Otto von Bismarck were unable to discipline
democracies. Neither order reflected a perfect
the power of the modern German state he did so much
consensus; rather, each offered enough agreement so
to bring about. Two other lessons stand out. First, it is
that it was not directly challenged. Where U.S. foreign
not just core issues that can cause an order to
policy got into trouble—such as in Vietnam and Iraq—it
deteriorate. The concert’s great-power comity ended not
was not because of alliance commitments or
because of disagreements over the social and political
considerations of order but because of ill-advised
order within Europe but because of competition on the
decisions to prosecute costly wars of choice.
periphery. And second, because orders tend to end with
a whimper rather than a bang, the process of SIGNS OF DECAY
deterioration is often not evident to decision-makers Today, both orders have deteriorated. Although the Cold
until it has advanced considerably. By the outbreak of War itself ended long ago, the order it created came
World War I, when it became obvious that the Concert apart in a more piecemeal fashion—in part because
of Europe no longer held, it was far too late to save Western efforts to integrate Russia into the liberal world
it—or even to manage its dissolution. order achieved little. One sign of the Cold War order’s
deterioration was Saddam Hussein’s 1990 invasion of
A TALE OF TWO ORDERS
Kuwait, something Moscow likely would have prevented
The global order built in the aftermath of World War II
in previous years on the grounds that it was too risky.
consisted of two parallel orders for most of its history.
Although nuclear deterrence still holds, some of the
One grew out of the Cold War between the United States
arms control agreements buttressing it have been
and the Soviet Union. At its core was a rough balance of
broken, and others are fraying. Although Russia has
military strength in Europe and Asia, backed up by
6
avoided any direct military challenge to NATO, it has flows of migrants and refugees, and the power of social
nonetheless shown a growing willingness to disrupt the media to spread hate. Meanwhile, effective statecraft is
status quo: through its use of force in Georgia in 2008 conspicuously lacking. Institutions have failed to adapt.
and Ukraine since 2014, its often indiscriminate military No one today would design a UN Security Council that
intervention in Syria, and its aggressive use of looked like the current one; yet real reform is impossible,
cyberwarfare to attempt to affect political outcomes in since those who would lose influence block any changes.
the United States and Europe. All of these represent a Efforts to build effective frameworks to deal with the
rejection of the principal constraints associated with the challenges of globalization, including climate change
old order. From a Russian perspective, the same might and cyberattacks, have come up short. Mistakes within
be said of NATO enlargement, an initiative clearly at the EU—namely, the decisions to establish a common
odds with Winston Churchill’s dictum “In victory, currency without creating a common fiscal policy or a
magnanimity.” Russia also judged the 2003 Iraq war banking union and to permit nearly unlimited
and the 2011 NATO military intervention in Libya, immigration to Germany—have created a powerful
which was undertaken in the name of humanitarianism backlash against existing governments, open borders,
but quickly evolved into regime change, as acts of bad and the EU itself. The United States, for its part, has
faith and illegality inconsistent with notions of world committed costly overreach in trying to remake
order as it understood them. The liberal order is Afghanistan, invading Iraq, and pursuing regime change
exhibiting its own signs of deterioration. in Libya. But it has also taken a step back from
Authoritarianism is on the rise not just in the obvious maintaining global order and in certain cases has been
places, such as China and Russia, but also in the guilty of costly underreach. In most instances, U.S.
Philippines, Turkey, and eastern Europe. Global trade reluctance to act has come not over core issues but over
has grown, but recent rounds of trade talks have ended peripheral ones that leaders wrote off as not worth the
without agreement, and the World Trade Organization costs involved, such as the strife in Syria, where the
(WTO) has proved unable to deal with today’s most United States failed to respond meaningfully when Syria
pressing challenges, including nontariff barriers and the first used chemical weapons or to do more to help
theft of intellectual property. Resentment over the anti-regime groups. This reluctance has increased
United States’ exploitation of the dollar to impose others’ propensity to disregard U.S. concerns and act
sanctions is growing, as is concern over the country’s independently. The Saudi-led military intervention in
accumulation of debt. The UN Security Council is of Yemen is a case in point. Russian actions in Syria and
little relevance to most of the world’s conflicts, and Ukraine should also be seen in this light; it is interesting
international arrangements have failed more broadly to that Crimea marked the effective end of the Concert of
contend with the challenges associated with Europe and signaled a dramatic setback in the current
globalization. The composition of the Security Council order. Doubts about U.S. reliability have multiplied
bears less and less resemblance to the real distribution under the Trump administration, thanks to its
of power. The world has put itself on the record as withdrawal from numerous international pacts and its
against genocide and has asserted a right to intervene conditional approach to once inviolable U.S. alliance
when governments fail to live up to the “responsibility commitments in Europe and Asia.
to protect” their citizens, but the talk has not translated
MANAGING THE DETERIORATION
into action. The Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty allows
Given these changes, resurrecting the old order will be
only five states to have nuclear weapons, but there are
impossible. It would also be insufficient, thanks to the
now nine that do (and many others that could follow
emergence of new challenges. Once this is
suit if they chose to). The EU, by far the most significant
acknowledged, the long deterioration of the Concert of
regional arrangement, is struggling with Brexit and
Europe should serve as a lesson and a warning. For the
disputes over migration and sovereignty. And around
United States to heed that warning would mean
the world, countries are increasingly resisting U.S.
strengthening certain aspects of the old order and
primacy.
supplementing them with measures that account for
POWER SHIFTS changing power dynamics and new global problems.
Why is all this happening? It is instructive to look back The United States would have to shore up arms control
to the gradual demise of the Concert of Europe. Today’s and nonproliferation agreements; strengthen its
world order has struggled to cope with power shifts: alliances in Europe and Asia; bolster weak states that
China’s rise, the appearance of several medium powers cannot contend with terrorists, cartels, and gangs; and
(Iran and North Korea, in particular) that reject counter authoritarian powers’ interference in the
important aspects of the order, and the emergence of democratic process. Yet it should not give up trying to
nonstate actors (from drug cartels to terrorist networks) integrate China and Russia into regional and global
that can pose a serious threat to order within and aspects of the order. Such efforts will necessarily involve
between states. The technological and political context a mix of compromise, incentives, and pushback. The
has changed in important ways, too. Globalization has judgment that attempts to integrate China and Russia
had destabilizing effects, ranging from climate change to have mostly failed should not be grounds for rejecting
the spread of technology into far more hands than ever future efforts, as the course of the twenty-first century
before, including a range of groups and people intent on will in no small part reflect how those efforts fare. The
disrupting the order. Nationalism and populism have United States also needs to reach out to others to
surged—the result of greater inequality within countries, address problems of globalization, especially climate
the dislocation associated with the 2008 financial crisis, change, trade, and cyber-operations. These will require
job losses caused by trade and technology, increased not resurrecting the old order but building a new one.
7
Efforts to limit, and adapt to, climate change need to be place a premium on maintaining domestic stability.
more ambitious. The WTO must be amended to address There would be a return to spheres of influence, with
the sorts of issues raised by China’s appropriation of China attempting to dominate its region, likely resulting
technology, provision of subsidies to domestic firms, in clashes with other regional powers, such as India,
and use of nontariff barriers to trade. Rules of the road Japan, and Vietnam, which would probably build up
are needed to regulate cyberspace. Together, this is their conventional or even nuclear forces. A new
tantamount to a call for a modern-day concert. Such a democratic, rules-based order fashioned and led by
call is ambitious but necessary. The United States must medium powers in Europe and Asia, as well as Canada,
show restraint and recapture a degree of respect in however attractive a concept, would simply lack the
order to regain its reputation as a benign actor. This will military capacity and domestic political will to get very
require some sharp departures from the way U.S. far. A more likely alternative is a world with little
foreign policy has been practiced in recent years: to start,order—a world of deeper disarray. Protectionism,
no longer carelessly invading other countries and no nationalism, and populism would gain, and democracy
longer weaponizing U.S. economic policy through the would lose. Conflict within and across borders would
overuse of sanctions and tariffs. But more than anything become more common, and rivalry between great
else, the current reflexive opposition to multilateralism powers would increase. Cooperation on global
needs to be rethought. It is one thing for a world order challenges would be all but precluded. If this picture
to unravel slowly; it is quite another for the country that sounds familiar, that is because it increasingly
had a large hand in building it to take the lead in corresponds to the world of today. The deterioration of a
dismantling it. All of this also requires that the United world order can set in motion trends that spell
States get its own house in order— reducing government catastrophe. World War I broke out some 60 years after
debt, rebuilding infrastructure, improving public the Concert of Europe had for all intents and purposes
education, investing more in the social safety net, broken down in Crimea. What we are seeing today
adopting a smart immigration system that allows resembles the mid-nineteenth century in important
talented foreigners to come and stay, tackling political ways: the post–World War II, post–Cold War order
dysfunction by making it less difficult to vote, and cannot be restored, but the world is not yet on the edge
undoing gerrymandering. The United States cannot of a systemic crisis. Now is the time to make sure one
effectively promote order abroad if it is divided at home, never materializes, be it from a breakdown in
distracted by domestic problems, and lacking in U.S.-Chinese relations, a clash with Russia, a
resources. The major alternatives to a modernized world conflagration in the Middle East, or the cumulative
order supported by the United States appear unlikely, effects of climate change. The good news is that it is far
unappealing, or both. A Chinese-led order, for example, from inevitable that the world will eventually arrive at a
would be an illiberal one, characterized by authoritarian catastrophe; the bad news is that it is far from certain
domestic political systems and statist economies that that it will not. (Foreign Affairs, December 11, 2018)
A New Americanism by Jill Lepore

Why a Nation Needs a National Story?
In 1986, the Pulitzer Prize–winning, bowtie-wearing Fascism and communism were dead, Fukuyama
Stanford historian Carl Degler delivered something announced at the end of the Cold War. Nationalism, the
other than the usual pipe-smoking, scotch-on-therocks, greatest remaining threat to liberalism, had been
after-dinner disquisition that had plagued the evening “defanged” in the West, and in other parts of the world
program of the annual meeting of the American where it was still kicking, well, that wasn’t quite
Historical Association for nearly all of its centurylong nationalism. “The vast majority of the world’s
history. Instead, Degler, a gentle and quietly heroic man, nationalist movements do not have a political program
accused his colleagues of nothing short of dereliction of beyond the negative desire of independence from some
duty: appalled by nationalism, they had abandoned the other group or people, and do not offer anything like a
study of the nation. “We can write history that implicitly comprehensive agenda for socio-economic
denies or ignores the nation-state, but it would be a organization,” Fukuyama wrote. (Needless to say, he has
history that flew in the face of what people who live in a since had to walk a lot of this back, writing in his most
nation-state require and demand,” Degler said that recent book about the “unexpected” populist
night in Chicago. He issued a warning: “If we historians nationalism of Russia’s Vladimir Putin, Poland’s
fail to provide a nationally defined history, others less Jaroslaw Kaczynski, Hungary’s Viktor Orban, Turkey’s
critical and less informed will take over the job for us.” Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the Philippines’ Rodrigo Duterte,
The nation-state was in decline, said the wise men of the and the United States’ Donald Trump.) Fukuyama was
time. The world had grown global. Why bother to study hardly alone in pronouncing nationalism all but dead. A
the nation? Nationalism, an infant in the nineteenth lot of other people had, too. That’s what worried Degler.
century, had become, in the first half of the twentieth, a
Nation-states, when they form, imagine a past. That, at
monster. But in the second half, it was nearly dead—a
least in part, accounts for why modern historical writing
stumbling, ghastly wraith, at least outside postcolonial
arose with the nation-state. For more than a century,
states. And historians seemed to believe that if they
the nation-state was the central object of historical
stopped studying it, it would die sooner: starved,
inquiry. From George Bancroft in the 1830s through,
neglected, and abandoned. Francis Fukuyama is a
say, Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., or Richard Hofstadter,
political scientist, not a historian. But his 1989 essay
studying American history meant studying the
“The End of History?” illustrated Degler’s point.
American nation. As the historian John Higham put it,
8
“From the middle of the nineteenth century until the the Articles of Confederation, with a national system.
1960s, the nation was the grand subject of American When John Jay insisted, in The Federalist Papers, no. 2,
history.” Over that same stretch of time, the United “that Providence has been pleased to give this one
States experienced a civil war, emancipation, connected country to one united people—a people
reconstruction, segregation, two world wars, and descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same
unprecedented immigration— making the task even language, professing the same religion, attached to the
more essential. “A history in common is fundamental to same principles of government, very similar in their
sustaining the affiliation that constitutes national manners and customs,” he was whistling in the dark.
subjects,” the historian Thomas Bender once observed. One way to turn a state into a nation is to write its
“Nations are, among other things, a collective agreement, history. It was the lack of these similarities that led
partly coerced, to affirm a common history as the basis Federalists such as Noah Webster to attempt to
for a shared future.” But in the 1970s, studying the manufacture a national character by urging Americans
nation fell out of favor in the American historical to adopt distinctive spelling. “Language, as well as
profession. Most historians started looking at either government should be national,” Webster wrote in 1789.
smaller or bigger things, investigating the experiences “America should have her own distinct from all the
and cultures of social groups or taking the broad world.” That got the United States “favor” instead of
vantage promised by global history. This turn produced “favour.” It did not, however, make the United States a
excellent scholarship. But meanwhile, who was doing nation. And by 1828, when Webster published his
the work of providing a legible past and a plausible monumental American Dictionary of the English
future—a nation—to the people who lived in the United Language, he did not include the word “nationalism,”
States? Charlatans, stooges, and tyrants. The endurance which had no meaning or currency in the United States
of nationalism proves that there’s never any shortage of in the 1820s. Not until the 1840s, when European
blackguards willing to prop up people’s sense of nations were swept up in what has been called “the age
themselves and their destiny with a tissue of myths and of nationalities,” did Americans come to think of
prophecies, prejudices and hatreds, or to empty out old themselves as belonging to a nation, with a destiny. This
rubbish bags full of festering resentments and calls to course of events is so unusual, in the matter of nation
violence. When historians abandon the study of the building, that the historian David Armitage has
nation, when scholars stop trying to write a common suggested that the United States is something other
history for a people, nationalism doesn’t die. Instead, it than a nation-state. “What we mean by nationalism is
eats liberalism. Maybe it’s too late to restore a common the desire of nations (however defined) to possess states
history, too late for historians to make a difference. But to create the peculiar hybrid we call the nation-state,”
is there any option other than to try to craft a new Armitage writes, but “there’s also a beast we might call
American history—one that could foster a new the state?nation, which arises when the state is formed
Americanism? before the development of any sense of national
consciousness. The United States might be seen as a,
THE NATION AND THE STATE
perhaps the only, spectacular example of the
The United States is different from other nations—every
latter”—not a nation-state but a state-nation. One way
nation is different from every other—and its nationalism
to turn a state into a nation is to write its history. The
is different, too. To review: a nation is a people with
first substantial history of the American nation,
common origins, and a state is a political community
Bancroft’s ten-volume History of the United States,
governed by laws. A nation-state is a political
From the Discovery of the American Continent, was
community governed by laws that unites a people with a
published between 1834 and 1874. Bancroft wasn’t only
supposedly common ancestry. When nation-states arose
a historian; he was also a politician who served in the
out of city-states and kingdoms and empires, they
administrations of three U.S. presidents, including as
explained themselves by telling stories about their
secretary of war in the age of American continental
origins—stories meant to suggest that everyone in, say,
expansion. An architect of manifest destiny, Bancroft
“the French nation” had common ancestors, when they
wrote his history in an attempt to make the United
of course did not. As I wrote in my book These Truths,
States’ founding appear inevitable, its growth inexorable,
“Very often, histories of nation-states are little more
and its history ancient. De?emphasizing its British
than myths that hide the seams that stitch the nation to
inheritance, he celebrated the United States as a
the state.” But in the American case, the origins of the
pluralistic and cosmopolitan nation, with ancestors all
nation can be found in those seams. When the United
over the world: The origin of the language we speak
States declared its independence, in 1776, it became a
carries us to India; our religion is from Palestine; of the
state, but what made it a nation? The fiction that its
hymns sung in our churches, some were first heard in
people shared a common ancestry was absurd on its face;
Italy, some in the deserts of Arabia, some on the banks
they came from all over, and, after having waged a war
of the Euphrates; our arts come from Greece; our
against Great Britain, just about the last thing they
jurisprudence from Rome. Nineteenth-century
wanted to celebrate was their Britishness. Long after
nationalism was liberal, a product of the Enlightenment.
independence, most Americans saw the United States
It rested on an analogy between the individual and the
not as a nation but, true to the name, as a confederation
collective. As the American theorist of nationalism Hans
of states. That’s what made arguing for ratification of
Kohn once wrote, “The concept of national self-
the Constitution an uphill battle; it’s also why the
determination—transferring the ideal of liberty from the
Constitution’s advocates called themselves “Federalists,”
individual to the organic collectivity—was raised as the
when they were in fact nationalists, in the sense that
banner of liberalism.” Liberal nationalism, as an idea, is
they were proposing to replace a federal system, under
fundamentally historical. Nineteenth-century
9
Americans understood the nation-state within the founders of the Confederacy answered: we will craft a
context of an emerging set of ideas about human rights: new constitution, based on white supremacy. In 1861,
namely, that the power of the state guaranteed everyone the Confederacy’s newly elected vice president,
eligible for citizenship the same set of irrevocable Alexander Stephens, delivered a speech in Savannah in
political rights. The future Massachusetts senator which he explained that the ideas that lay behind the
Charles Sumner offered this interpretation in 1849: U.S. Constitution “rested upon the assumption of the
Here is the Great Charter of every human being drawing equality of races”—here ceding Lincoln’s argument—
vital breath upon this soil, whatever may be his but that “our new government is founded upon exactly
condition, and whoever may be his parents. He may be the opposite ideas; its foundations are laid, its
poor, weak, humble, or black,—he may be of Caucasian, cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is
Jewish, Indian, or Ethiopian race,—he may be of French, not equal to the white man; that slavery is his natural
German, English, or Irish extraction; but before the and moral condition.” The North won the war. But the
Constitution of Massachusetts all these distinctions battle between liberal and illiberal nationalism raged on,
disappear. . . . He is a MAN, the equal of all his especially during the debates over the 14th and 15th
fellow-men. He is one of the children of the State, which, Amendments, which marked a second founding of the
like an impartial parent, regards all of its offspring with United States on terms set by liberal ideas about the
an equal care. Or as the Prussian-born American rights of citizens and the powers of
political philosopher Francis Lieber, a great influence on nation-states—namely, birthright citizenship, equal
Sumner, wrote, “Without a national character, states rights, universal (male) suffrage, and legal protections
cannot obtain that longevity and continuity of political for noncitizens. These Reconstruction-era amendments
society which is necessary for our progress.” Lieber’s also led to debates over immigration, racial and gender
most influential essay, “Nationalism: A Fragment of equality, and the limits of citizenship. Under the terms
Political Science,” appeared in 1860, on the very eve of of the 14th Amendment, children of Chinese immigrants
the Civil War. born in the United States would be U.S. citizens. Few
major political figures talked about Chinese immigrants
THE UNION AND THE CONFEDERACY
in favorable terms. Typical was the virulent prejudice
The American Civil War was a struggle over two
expressed by William Higby, a one-time miner and
competing ideas of the nation?state. This struggle has
Republican congressman from California. “The Chinese
never ended; it has just moved around. In the
are nothing but a pagan race,” Higby said in 1866. “You
antebellum United States, Northerners, and especially
cannot make good citizens of them.” And opponents of
northern abolitionists, drew a contrast between
the 15th Amendment found both African American
(northern) nationalism and (southern) sectionalism.
voting and Chinese citizenship scandalous. Fumed
“We must cultivate a national, instead of a sectional
Garrett Davis, a Democratic senator from Kentucky: “I
patriotism” urged one Michigan congressman in 1850.
want no negro government; I want no Mongolian
But Southerners were nationalists, too. It’s just that
government; I want the government of the white man
their nationalism was what would now be termed
which our fathers incorporated.” The most significant
“illiberal” or “ethnic,” as opposed to the Northerners’
statement in this debate was made by a man born into
liberal or civic nationalism. This distinction has been
slavery who had sought his own freedom and fought for
subjected to much criticism, on the grounds that it’s
decades for emancipation, citizenship, and equal rights.
nothing more than a way of calling one kind of
In 1869, in front of audiences across the country,
nationalism good and another bad. But the nationalism
Frederick Douglass delivered one of the most important
of the North and that of the South were in fact different,
and least read speeches in American political history,
and much of U.S. history has been a battle between
urging the ratification of the 14th and 15th Amendments
them. “Ours is the government of the white man,” the
in the spirit of establishing a “composite nation.” He
American statesman John C. Calhoun declared in 1848,
spoke, he said, “to the question of whether we are the
arguing against admitting Mexicans as citizens of the
better or the worse for being composed of different
United States. “This Government was made by our
races of men.” If nations, which are essential for
fathers on the white basis,” the American politician
progress, form from similarity, what of nations like the
Stephen Douglas said in 1858. “It was made by white
United States, which are formed out of difference,
men for the benefit of white men and their posterity
Native American, African, European, Asian, and every
forever.” Abraham Lincoln, building on arguments
possible mixture, “the most conspicuous example of
made by black abolitionists, exposed Douglas’ history as
composite nationality in the world”? To Republicans
fiction. “I believe the entire records of the world, from
like Higby, who objected to Chinese immigration and to
the date of the Declaration of Independence up to within
birthright citizenship, and to Democrats like Davis, who
three years ago, may be searched in vain for one single
objected to citizenship and voting rights for anyone
affirmation, from one single man, that the negro was not
other than white men, Douglass offered an impassioned
included in the Declaration of Independence,” Lincoln
reply. As for the Chinese: “Do you ask, if I would favor
said during a debate with Douglas in Galesburg, Illinois,
such immigration? I answer, I would. Would you have
in 1858. He continued: I think I may defy Judge Douglas
them naturalized, and have them invested with all the
to show that he ever said so, that Washington ever said
rights of American citizenship? I would. Would you
so, that any President ever said so, that any member of
allow them to vote? I would.” As for future generations,
Congress ever said so, or that any living man upon the
and future immigrants to the United States, Douglass
whole earth ever said so, until the necessities of the
said, “I want a home here not only for the negro, the
present policy of the Democratic party, in regard to
mulatto and the Latin races; but I want the Asiatic to
slavery, had to invent that affirmation. No matter, the
find a home here in the United States, and feel at home
10
here, both for his sake and for ours.” For Douglass, And a great many association presidents, notably
progress could only come in this new form of a nation, Woodrow Wilson, mourned what had come to be called
the composite nation. “We shall spread the network of “the Lost Cause of the Confederacy.” All offered national
our science and civilization over all who seek their histories that left out the origins and endurance of racial
shelter, whether from Asia, Africa, or the Isles of the inequality. Meanwhile, nationalism changed, beginning
sea,” he said, and “all shall here bow to the same law, in the 1910s and especially in the 1930s. And the uglier
speak the same language, support the same Government, and more illiberal nationalism got, the more liberals
enjoy the same liberty, vibrate with the same national became convinced of the impossibility of liberal
enthusiasm, and seek the same national ends.” That was nationalism. In the United States, nationalism largely
Douglass’ new Americanism. It did not prevail. took the form of economic protectionism and
Emancipation and Reconstruction, the historian and isolationism. In 1917, the publishing magnate William
civil rights activist W. E. B. Du Bois would write in 1935, Randolph Hearst, opposing U.S. involvement in World
was “the finest effort to achieve democracy . . . this War I, began calling for “America first,” and he took the
world had ever seen.” But that effort had been betrayed same position in 1938, insisting that “Americans should
by white Northerners and white Southerners who maintain the traditional policy of our great and
patched the United States back together by inventing a independent nation—great largely because it is
myth that the war was not a fight over slavery at all but independent.” In the years before the United States
merely a struggle between the nation and the states. entered World War II, a fringe even supported Hitler;
“We fell under the leadership of those who would Charles Coughlin—a priest, near presidential candidate,
compromise with truth in the past in order to make and wildly popular broadcaster—took to the radio to
peace in the present,” Du Bois wrote bitterly. Douglass’ preach anti-Semitism and admiration for Hitler and the
new Americanism was thus forgotten. So was Du Bois’ Nazi Party and called on his audience to form a new
reckoning with American history. political party, the Christian Front. In 1939, about
20,000 Americans, some dressed in Nazi uniforms,
NATIONAL HISTORIES
gathered in Madison Square Garden, decorated with
The American Historical Association was founded in
swastikas and American flags, with posters declaring a
1884—two years after the French philosopher Ernest
“Mass Demonstration for True Americanism,” where
Renan wrote his signal essay, “What Is a Nation?”
they denounced the New Deal as the “Jew Deal.” Hitler,
Nationalism was taking a turn, away from liberalism
for his part, expressed admiration for the Confederacy
and toward illiberalism, including in Germany,
and regret that “the beginnings of a great new social
beginning with the “blood and iron” of Bismarck. A
order based on the principle of slavery and inequality
driver of this change was the emergence of mass politics,
were destroyed by the war.” As one arm of a campaign
under whose terms nation?states “depended on the
to widen divisions in the United States and weaken
participation of the ordinary citizen to an extent not
American resolve, Nazi propaganda distributed in the
previously envisaged,” as the historian Eric Hobsbawm
Jim Crow South called for the repeal of the 14th and
once wrote. That “placed the question of the ‘nation,’
15th Amendments. The “America first” supporter
and the citizen’s feelings towards whatever he regarded
Charles Lindbergh, who, not irrelevantly, had become
as his ‘nation,’ ‘nationality’ or other centre of loyalty, at
famous by flying across the Atlantic alone, based his
the top of the political agenda.” This transformation
nationalism on geography. “One need only glance at a
began in the United States in the 1880s, with the rise of
map to see where our true frontiers lie,” he said in 1939.
Jim Crow laws, and with a regime of immigration
“What more could we ask than the Atlantic Ocean on
restriction, starting with the Chinese Exclusion Act, the
the east and the Pacific on the west?” (This President
first federal law restricting immigration, which was
Franklin Roosevelt answered in 1940, declaring the
passed in 1882. Both betrayed the promises and
dream that the United States was “a lone island,” to be,
constitutional guarantees made by the 14th and 15th
in fact, a nightmare, “the nightmare of a people lodged
Amendments. Fighting to realize that promise would be
in prison, handcuffed, hungry, and fed through the bars
the work of standard-bearers who included Ida B. Wells,
from day to day by the contemptuous, unpitying
who led a campaign against lynching, and Wong Chin
masters of other continents.”) In the wake of World War
Foo, who founded the Chinese Equal Rights League in
II, American historians wrote the history of the United
1892, insisting, “We claim a common manhood with all
States as a story of consensus, an unvarying “liberal
other nationalities.” The uglier and more illiberal
tradition in America,” according to the political scientist
nationalism got, the more liberals became convinced of
Louis Hartz, that appeared to stretch forward in time
the impossibility of liberal nationalism. But the white
into an unvarying liberal future. Schlesinger, writing in
men who delivered speeches at the annual meetings of
1949, argued that liberals occupied “the vital center” of
the American Historical Association during those years
American politics. These historians had plenty of blind
had little interest in discussing racial segregation, the
spots—they were especially blind to the forces of
disenfranchisement of black men, or immigration
conservatism and fundamentalism— but they
restriction. Frederick Jackson Turner drew historians’
nevertheless offered an expansive, liberal account of the
attention to the frontier. Others contemplated the
history of the American nation and the American people.
challenges of populism and socialism. Progressive-era
The last, best single-volume popular history of the
historians explained the American nation as a product
United States written in the twentieth century was
of conflict “between democracy and privilege, the poor
Degler’s 1959 book, Out of Our Past: The Forces That
versus the rich, the farmers against the monopolists, the
Shaped Modern America: a stunning, sweeping account
workers against the corporations, and, at times, the Free
that, greatly influenced by Du Bois, placed race, slavery,
Soilers against the slaveholders,” as Degler observed.
segregation, and civil rights at the center of the story,
11
alongside liberty, rights, revolution, freedom, and foreign policy and regimes of political oppression at
equality. Astonishingly, it was Degler’s first book. It was home. “The professional practice of history writing and
also the last of its kind. teaching flourished as the handmaiden of
nation-making; the nation provided both support and
THE DECLINE OF NATIONAL HISTORY
an appreciative audience,” Bender observed in
If love of the nation is what drove American historians
Rethinking American History in a Global Age in 2002.
to the study of the past in the nineteenth century, hatred
“Only recently,” he continued, “and because of the
for nationalism drove American historians away from it
uncertain status of the nation-state has it been
in the second half of the twentieth century. It had long
recognized that history as a professional discipline is
been clear that nationalism was a contrivance, an
part of its own substantive narrative and not at all
artifice, a fiction. After World War II, while U.S.
sufficiently self?conscious about the implications of that
President Harry Truman was helping establish what
circularity.” Since then, historians have only become
came to be called “the liberal international order,”
more self-conscious, to the point of paralysis. If
internationalists began predicting the end of the
nationalism was a pathology, the thinking went, the
nation-state, with the Harvard political scientist Rupert
writing of national histories was one of its symptoms,
Emerson declaring that “the nation and the nation-state
just another form of myth making. If love of the nation
are anachronisms in the atomic age.” By the 1960s,
is what drove American historians to the study of the
nationalism looked rather worse than an anachronism.
past in the nineteenth century, hatred for nationalism
Meanwhile, with the coming of the Vietnam War,
drove American historians away from it in the second
American historians stopped studying the nation-state
half of the twentieth century.
in part out of a fear of complicity with atrocities of U.S.
Something else was going on, too. Beginning in the 1869: A Government founded upon justice, and
1960s, women and people of color entered the historical recognizing the equal rights of all men; claiming no
profession and wrote new, rich, revolutionary histories, higher authority for existence, or sanction for its laws,
asking different questions and drawing different than nature, reason, and the regularly ascertained will
conclusions. Historical scholarship exploded, and got of the people; steadily refusing to put its sword and
immeasurably richer and more sophisticated. In a purse in the service of any religious creed or family, is a
there-goes-the-neighborhood moment, many older standing offense to most of the Governments of the
historians questioned the value of this scholarship. world, and to some narrow and bigoted people among
Degler did not; instead, he contributed to it. Most ourselves. At the close of the Cold War, some
historians who wrote about race were not white and commentators concluded that the American experiment
most historians who wrote about women were not men, had ended in triumph, that the United States had
but Degler, a white man, was one of two male become all the world. But the American experiment had
co?founders of the National Organization for Women not in fact ended. A nation founded on revolution and
and won a Pulitzer in 1972 for a book called Neither universal rights will forever struggle against chaos and
Black nor White. Still, he shared the concern expressed the forces of particularism. A nation born in
by Higham that most new American historical contradiction will forever fight over the meaning of its
scholarship was “not about the United States but merely history. But that doesn’t mean history is meaningless, or
in the United States.” By 1986, when Degler rose from that anyone can afford to sit out the fight. “The history
his chair to deliver his address before the American of the United States at the present time does not seek to
Historical Association, a lot of historians in the United answer any significant questions,” Degler told his
States had begun advocating a kind of historical audience some three decades ago. If American
cosmopolitanism, writing global rather than national historians don’t start asking and answering those sorts
history. Degler didn’t have much patience for this. A few of questions, other people will, he warned. They’ll echo
years later, after the onset of civil war in Bosnia, the Calhoun and Douglas and Father Coughlin. They’ll
political philosopher Michael Walzer grimly announced lament “American carnage.” They’ll call immigrants
that “the tribes have returned.” They had never left. “animals” and other states “shithole countries.” They’ll
They’d only become harder for historians to see, because adopt the slogan “America first.” They’ll say they can
they weren’t really looking anymore. “make America great again.” They’ll call themselves
“nationalists.” Their history will be a fiction. They will
A NEW AMERICAN HISTORY
say that they alone love this country. They will be wrong.
Writing national history creates plenty of problems. But
(Foreign Affairs, February 5, 2019)
not writing national history creates more problems, and
these problems are worse. What would a new CORRECTION APPENDED (February 26, 2019) An
Americanism and a new American history look like? earlier version of this article misidentified the U.S.
They might look rather a lot like the composite president who began building the liberal international
nationalism imagined by Douglass and the clear-eyed order after World War II. It was Harry Truman, not
histories written by Du Bois. They might take as their Franklin Roosevelt.
starting point the description of the American
experiment and its challenges offered by Douglass in
12
The Longest Wars by George Packer
Richard Holbrooke and the Decline of American Power
One of the most celebrated diplomats of his generation, bleeding through a pair of cloth napkins—yes, he was in
Richard Holbrooke helped normalize U.S. relations with almost every way a disorderly presence. But his eyes
China; served as U.S. ambassador to a newly reunified never lost focus. So much thought, so little inwardness.
Germany and then to the United Nations; and, most He could not be alone—he might have had to think
famously, negotiated the 1995 Dayton peace agreement about himself. Maybe that was something he couldn’t
that ended the war in Bosnia. But he began and ended afford to do. Leslie Gelb, Holbrooke’s friend of 45 years
his career struggling with how to resolve two American and recipient of multiple daily phone calls, would butt
wars: first in Vietnam, then in Afghanistan. Richard into a monologue and ask, “What’s Obama like?”
Holbrooke was six feet one but seemed bigger. He had Holbrooke would give a brilliant analysis of the
long skinny limbs and a barrel chest and broad square president. “How do you think you affect Obama?”
shoulder bones, on top of which sat his strangely small Holbrooke had nothing to say. Where did it come from,
head and, encased within it, the sleepless brain. His feet that blind spot behind his eyes that masked his inner
were so far from his trunk that, as his body wore down life? It was a great advantage over the rest of us, because
and the blood stopped circulating properly, they swelled the propulsion from idea to action was never broken by
up and became marbled red and white like steak. He self?scrutiny. It was also a great vulnerability, and
had special shoes made and carried extra socks in his finally, it was fatal.
leather attaché case, sweating through half a dozen pairs
SOUTH VIETNAM-1963
a day, stripping them off on long flights and draping
In 1963, Holbrooke was a 22-year-old U.S. Foreign
them over his seat pocket in first class, or else cramming
Service officer on his first diplomatic posting, to South
used socks next to the classified documents in his
Vietnam. The State Department detailed Holbrooke to
briefcase. He wrote his book about ending the war in
the U.S. Agency for International Development in
Bosnia—the place in history that he always craved,
Saigon and a small, unconventional entity called Rural
though it was never enough—with his feet planted in a
Affairs. It was an odd place for a young diplomat to
Brookstone shiatsu foot massager. One morning he
land—unheard of, really. Holbrooke and a colleague
showed up late for a meeting in the secretary of state’s
were going to be the first Foreign Service officers sent
suite at the Waldorf Astoria in his stocking feet, shirt
into the field as aid workers. The agency would put
untucked and fly half zipped, padding around the room
them out among peasants in Vietcong strongholds
and picking grapes off a fruit basket, while Madeleine
where the war was being fought and have them hand
Albright’s furious stare tracked his every move. During a
out bulgur wheat, cement, fertilizer, and barbed wire. As
videoconference call from the U.S. mission to the United
bachelors, they were considered relatively expendable.
Nations, in New York, his feet were propped up on a
It was an early experiment in counterinsurgency. Within
chair, while down in the White House Situation Room
just a couple of months of arriving in Vietnam,
their giant distortion completely filled the wall screen
Holbrooke had maneuvered his way into running the
and so disrupted the meeting that President Bill
Rural Affairs operation in the province of Ba Xuyen,
Clinton’s national security adviser finally ordered a
down in the Mekong Delta. Ba Xuyen was the end of the
military aide to turn off the video feed. Holbrooke put
earth. It was almost all the way to Ca Mau, and Ca Mau
his feet up anywhere, in the White House, on other
was the terminal point of the Asian continent, “the
people’s desks and coffee tables—for relief, and for
southernmost province of North Vietnam,” the New
advantage. Near the end, it seemed as if all his troubles
York Times correspondent David Halberstam once
were collecting in his feet—atrial fibrillation, marital
called it, because Ca Mau and the lower delta were the
tension, thwarted ambition, conspiring colleagues,
heartland of the Vietcong, the communist guerrillas who
hundreds of thousands of air miles, corrupt foreign
had been lurking for years among the hamlets and
leaders, a war that would not yield to the relentless force
canals and rice paddies and mangrove forests. Ba Xuyen
of his will. But at the other extreme from his feet, the
was a province of more than half a million, eight or nine
ice-blue eyes were on perpetual alert. Their light told
hours’ drive from Saigon down Route 4, across the
you that his intelligence was always awake and working.
interminable wet flatness of the delta, nothing but
They captured nearly everything and gave almost
flooded paddy fields mile after mile all the way to the
nothing away. Like one-way mirrors, they looked
horizon— in mid-September, when Holbrooke arrived
outward, not inward. No one was quicker to size up a
in the town of Soc Trang, the rice shoots were still
room, an adversary, a newspaper article, a set of
golden, not yet the emerald green of the
variables in a complex situation—even his own
harvest—though more often he would fly, since there
imminent death. The ceaseless appraising told of a
was a daily milk run on an Air America Caribou between
manic spirit churning somewhere within the low voice
Tan Son Nhut airport and airstrips around the delta,
and languid limbs. Once, in the 1980s, he was walking
and driving was risky by day and out of the question
down Madison Avenue when an acquaintance passed
after dark. His room was on the second floor of a
him and called out, “Hi, Dick.” Holbrooke watched the
clay-colored colonial guesthouse, with a balcony
man go by, then turned to his companion: “I wonder
overlooking the town square, across from the provincial
what he meant by that.” Yes, his curly hair never obeyed
headquarters and its tennis court. Next door to the
the comb, and his suit always looked rumpled, and he
guesthouse was a dance club called the Bungalow,
couldn’t stay off the phone or TV, and he kept losing
except that the government of South Vietnam had
things, and he ate as much food as fast as he could, once
banned dancing in order to protect the honor of
slicing open the tip of his nose on a clamshell and
Vietnamese women, so the Bungalow was now just a bar
13
where local soldiers could go drink and pick up girls. below us. My job as civilian advisor to the province chief
Holbrooke’s neighbors, also newly arrived, were a young and overseer of the aid program here puts me
Christian couple from Rhode Island, George and Renee continually in the position of advocate of plans and
McDowell. George was an aggie with International projects which would seek to make a reality out of the
Voluntary Services—he was introducing local farmers to clichés that everyone pays lip service to. I don’t mind
a strain of enormous watermelons from Georgia. this (actually enjoy it) but it is sometimes tiring to try to
Holbrooke made it known that he wasn’t interested. He get the Vietnamese to do something which is, after all,
and McDowell once went to the Soc Trang airstrip to for their own good (or so we think . . .). On the other
meet some officials visiting from Saigon, and Holbrooke hand, when I step back just a little to look at everything,
introduced himself: “I’m Richard Holbrooke, the AID it seems to me that the Vietnamese have taken our
man here in Ba Xuyen.” He gestured to McDowell, who overbearing presence rather well over the last few years.
was three years older. “This is George McDowell, the We arrive here with no knowledge of the country or of
IVS boy.” Holbrooke’s thing was strategic hamlets. the situation and immediately start giving advice, some
There were 324 of them in Ba Xuyen— at least, that was of which we can really turn almost into orders because
what he arrived believing. When he asked to visit a few of the materials and money and transportation that we
of the farther-flung hamlets he was told that it was too fully control. I think that no American would stand for
dangerous. He went anyway, in his white short-sleeve such a deep and continuing interference in our affairs,
button-up shirt, with his sunglasses case clipped to the even if it appeared that survival was at stake. Yet the
breast pocket, and found that the strategic hamlets Vietnamese accept it, and with rather good grace. At
consisted of punji sticks stuck in a moat and a barely 0500 this morning the news came in that the VC had
armed local militia. The Vietcong were overrunning and attacked and possibly overrun the furthest out outpost
destroying them at will. There were 3,000 hard-core in the southeastern district of Ba Xuyen. It is a
cadres in the province, according to the intelligence Cambodian post, located just three kilometers from a
reports. Saigon had permanently conceded half the mangrove forest which forms the point where the lower
provincial territory to the guerrillas, who had their own branch of the Mekong meets the South China Sea. The
district chiefs, tax collectors, and schools. At night only mangrove forest is a VC haven, as almost all mangrove
the towns belonged to the government. Nonetheless, in forests are. The post protects a huge and critical hamlet,
Saigon and Washington there were 324 strategic also Cambodian, which was originally scheduled to be
hamlets in Ba Xuyen, putting 61 percent of the visited by [Secretary of Defense Robert] McNamara
population under the government’s theoretical control. today before the schedule was cut. Anyway, by
In Soc Trang the war was very close. The airstrip was helicopter we flew out over the area for about an hour,
often hit by mortar fire. Holbrooke lost 15 pounds in the circling at around 1500 feet, and from that height it
heat. His room had no air conditioning or fan, no could be clearly seen that the post had been destroyed.
working toilet or shower, and he could never get away What the situation was on the ground could not yet be
from the mosquitoes, so he spent a good deal of time at known—we did not go any lower, since we were getting
a compound a block toward the canal that was occupied shot at from time to time as we moved over the area. We
by Americans from the Military Assistance Advisory refueled at Soc Trang, and joined an Eagle Flight
Group. They were among the 15,000 U.S. troops moving out over the area now. An Eagle is a group of
supporting the South Vietnamese army, often in combat. about 6 to 10 choppers, which fly very low over bad
The advisers had a small projector and showed movies areas, hoping to draw fire, after which they pounce. We
such as Seven Brides for Seven Brothers and Satan were above the main force choppers, which carry f
Never Sleeps, for which Holbrooke had a bottomless Vietnamese army. Finally, after the infantry had
appetite. On weekends he tried to get back to Saigon. reached the hamlet and post, we went in. On the ground
Holbrooke was a good writer, never better than in his was one of the worst sights I ever hope to see. The VC
youth. He wrote hundreds of letters. Let him tell it. I had apparently dug in with recoilless 75mm fire only 50
wish I could tell it all to you—the poorly lit room and bar yards away, and leveled the post before moving a man
that I am now sitting in, where the MAAG men sit and against it. (Such a weapon is definitely from China—
wait their tours out; the playmates from Playboy on the they never were used here by either US, French or VN.)
walls here, somehow very much out of place; the stacks Unlike most posts which fall here, it was apparently not
of old magazines and paperbacks, the other hints of an inside job. This may in part be due to the fact that
home that the US Army flies into the Vietcong’s these were Cambodians, and they are the best fighters
homeland to make us feel a little less lost; the water around. The fort was a shambles, of the 31 men in it 10
everywhere, rising, raining, so that literally this province,
were dead, as were 7 children and 4 women, who live
even the ground around our building, is under water; with their men in these terrible traps. The bodies were
the waiting; the ugliness, the cruelty, the tragedy. And in being assembled as we came in, and the noise of the
Saigon a regime so totally bankrupt and disgusting it is women wailing, plus the horrible air and stench that
hard to describe. There is something different about the overlay everything, was . . . One sees pictures of people
Delta. Flying over it begins to give you some idea of the picking their way through the war-torn rubble of Europe
problems. It is completely flat, and ⅔ of it is under and Japan, and we have seen this sort of thing often in
water right now. Yet it is the great VC [Vietcong] the histories of our times, but going in on the ground
stronghold, which may be the last to fall. How is it like this is still something new. One doesn’t know quite
possible? Where can they possibly be? Many are in the what his reactions will be. Mine were not as bad as I was
marshes and inaccessible swamps of the far south, but afraid they might be; perhaps little by little I have been
the fact is that for most, this day means being sheltered working up to this anyway. (There have been so many
in someone’s house and in one of the hamlets right similar to this, and Vietnam is such a cruel country to
14
begin with, but this was the worst I have yet been in credibility on not losing another square mile of Asia to
immediately afterwards.) But afterwards it has been communism even though the enemy were nationalists.
harder to put away the pictures of Can Nganh post. In a But counterinsurgency was part of the lure. It was what
way, so unreal, since the birds still flew around, and the kept Holbrooke and Americans like him there. We
children in the nearest houses, less than 50 yards away, prefer our wars quick and decisive, concluding with a
played games and seemed normal. But there were the surrender ceremony, and we like firepower more than
women crying over the torn bodies of their husbands, we want to admit, while counterinsurgency requires
and legs sticking out here and there grotesquely. I have supreme restraint. Its apostles in Vietnam used to say,
my doubts, getting deeper and deeper, about our basic “The best weapon for killing is a knife. If you can’t use a
approach here. Recent discussions and hints I have got knife, then a gun. The worst weapon is airpower.”
from various sources would indicate that out of the Counterinsurgency is, according to the experts, 80
McNamara visits came added weight for the exponents percent political. We spend our time on American
of Victory through Air Power—the Air Force, and the charts and plans and tasks, as if the solution to another
armed helicopters. I feel that this is a terrible step, bothcountry’s internal conflict is to get our own bureaucracy
morally and tactically. Of course, it would never do to right. And maybe we don’t take the politics of other
actually attack policy on moral grounds in the American people seriously. It comes down to the power of our
community here, which is a basically tough and getting belief in ourselves. If we are good—and are we not
tougher community (“War is hell,” justifies any horror). good?— then we won’t need to force other people to do
However, the decision to fight the VC from the air can what we want. They will know us by our deeds, and they
be quite easily attacked on the simple grounds of will want for themselves what we want for them. There
stupidity (or as Talleyrand once said, “Sir, it is worse was a Peanuts comic strip that circulated among
than a crime, it is a blunder”). The VC, I am convinced, Holbrooke and his friends in Vietnam. Charlie Brown’s
often fire on our planes merely to draw artillery and air baseball team has just gotten slaughtered, 184–0. “I
destruction down upon hamlets. This may sound don’t understand it,” Charlie Brown says. “How can we
amazing, but it is a generally accepted fact, and the lose when we’re so sincere?!”
reason for it that once we have committed such an act,
WASHINGTON, 1967
the VC can make great propaganda hay out of it. So,
Years later, Holbrooke would describe an almost
anyway, if by air power we mean to win this war,
inevitable sequence of doubt and disillusionment that
thousands of Vietnamese will die and the enemy will
took place in the minds of certain Americans in Vietnam.
resist far longer; we will be making a grave mistake and
First, they would begin to question official assessments
I am not happy about it. Of course the irony of the whole
of the war. Then, they would start to question U.S.
thing is overwhelming, if one is ever stupid enough to
tactics, and then, the strategy. By 1967, Holbrooke had
stop and think about it. Today, in Vietnam, we are using
entered the fourth and final stage of doubt. He began to
by far worse weapons and worse—less humane—tactics
question the American commitment in Vietnam. He had
than the enemy. I have no doubt at all that we kill more
returned home and taken a position as a senior aide to
civilians than the VC, and with what might generally be
Undersecretary of State Nicholas Katzenbach. Nine
admitted are less selective, less “right” tactics. I suppose
thousand miles away from Vietnam, he could see that
that we are on the right side in the long run here. There
the true threat was on the home front, that the war was
is no doubt in my mind that if we lose here we will be
tearing his country apart. He was coming to the
fighting this war in other countries in Latin America and
conclusion that the United States could never win, at
Asia within a few years. But right now, we are fighting
least not on terms that Americans would accept. But for
wrong, and it hurts. In the short run terms, we really
the few doves in government, that didn’t mean, “Let’s
should be on the other side. Take away the ties to Hanoi
get the hell out of Vietnam.” It meant, “What the hell do
and Peking and the VC are fighting for the things we
we do now?” That was about as far as skepticism could
should always be fighting for in the world. Instead we
take someone while he was still inside. The process of
continue to defend a class of haves which has not yet
disenchantment was excruciatingly slow. Later on,
shown its real ability to understand that the have-nots
people would backdate their moment of truth, their
must be brought into the nation. Let that be shown, and
long-deferred encounter with the glaringly obvious. This
perhaps there will be an improvement in the situation,
was often inadvertent—they honestly couldn’t believe
not of our making, but to our benefit. The whole damn
that they were so wrong for so many years. And when
thing makes me slightly ill. (Or is it my throat?) This is
they finally did begin to lose faith, they kept it to
the most exciting assignment in the world, and I will
themselves and a few sympathetic friends. Katzenbach,
always be grateful for having it. But I do not think I will
number two in the State Department, was having his
be sorry to leave. One friend of mine just got his next
own doubts. He began to meet with a dozen senior
assignment: Luxembourg. It seems almost a joke, but it
people from around the government every Thursday
is true. There are such places. I think I am beginning to
afternoon at five o’clock in his office on the seventh
see war, which goddamn it this really is, in the least
floor. For 90 minutes they would sit in a circle of chairs
glorified of lights. That is when the fight sometimes
and have drinks and talk about Vietnam. Katzenbach
doesn’t even seem worth it, so bloody is the cost. But
called it “the Non-Group,” because there was no agenda,
there is no choice, really, is there? Counterinsurgency
no paper trail, and no one was allowed to quote anyone
isn’t for everyone—it’s a sophisticated taste. In Vietnam
to outsiders. The Non?Group became a safe place to
it attracted the idealists. This attraction wasn’t what got
explore alternative policies—that was how deep the
Americans into the war. We fell into Vietnam and kept
lying and fear ran throughout the Johnson
on sinking out of a mistaken belief that the policy of
administration. Secretary of State Dean Rusk knew but
containment required us to stake our security and
15
never attended so that he wouldn’t be tainted by talk of Vietcong: “Too many people are appalled by the
peace. Holbrooke walked uninvited into Katzenbach’s brutality of the war. They feel that to fight a war of
office and badgered him so many times that Katzenbach, insurgency with vastly superior fire power is immoral
who found Holbrooke’s boyish enthusiasm refreshing, and counter-productive. . . . Some feeling (more abroad
finally agreed to let him join the Non-Group. than in the United States) is based on a feeling that the
Holbrooke’s neckties were too loud and his manner too United States is calloused where non-whites are
flip for some of his colleagues, but he kept quiet unless concerned.” And Johnson should announce a bombing
one of his superiors asked him a question. Thus he was halt over most of North Vietnam, which could lead to
allowed priceless time with senior members of the negotiations. “Time is the crucial element at this stage
foreign policy establishment, such as Averell Harriman, of our involvement in Viet?Nam,” Holbrooke concluded.
Walt Rostow, and McNamara’s deputy, Cyrus Vance. “If we can’t speed up the tortoise of demonstrable
Holbrooke was the only one of them with any experience success in the field we must concentrate on slowing
in Vietnam. On the evening of November 1, 11 elder down the hare of dissent at home.” The memo didn’t call
statesmen of the Cold War assembled at the State for unilateral withdrawal, or even negotiated
Department for drinks, dinner, and a briefing on withdrawal. It made an argument for a way to buy more
Vietnam. McNamara was there; he had just submitted a time. The war in Vietnam would go on. But on the
long memo to President Lyndon Johnson presenting a spectrum of official opinion, the view was far dovish. In
bleak view of the war, and he couldn’t conceal his gloom. vivid and uncompromising language, the 26-year-old
But Rusk remained a good soldier, and the briefing was author said that the United States could not win the war.
upbeat—body counts and captured documents showed For this reason Katzenbach hesitated to put his name to
that the United States was winning. The next morning, the memo. But since he agreed with it and thought its
the Wise Men filed into the Cabinet Room and, one by analysis brilliant, he finally signed it on November 16.
one, told Johnson what he wanted to hear—stay the He didn’t show the memo to Rusk until a copy had been
course. The president was greatly reassured. Katzenbach sent to the White House. When Rusk read it, he told
wasn’t. He thought the briefing of the Wise Men had Katzenbach, “I always try to find out what the president
been misleading and their validation of Johnson all thinks before I give my advice.” No word came back
wrong. Holbrooke thought so, too, and he offered to from the White House. Johnson didn’t want to hear it.
write up a dissenting memo for his boss to give to the
WASHINGTON, 2009
president. Government service tends to turn written
Right after taking office in 2009, President Barack
prose to fog and mud because it’s far better to say
Obama had to make a decision on the U.S. military’s
nothing intelligible than to make a mistake. Not in the
request to send 17,000 additional combat troops and
case of Holbrooke. In 17 pages, he laid out the strategic
4,000 trainers to Afghanistan. According to the
problem by turning to history: Hanoi uses time the way
Pentagon, the increase was necessary to stave off
the Russians used terrain before Napoleon’s advance on
growing chaos in the south and provide security for the
Moscow, always retreating, losing every battle, but
Afghan election in August. Secretary of State Hillary
eventually creating conditions in which the enemy can
Clinton had appointed Holbrooke to a position created
no longer function. For Napoleon it was his long supply
especially for him: special representative for
lines and the cold Russian winter; Hanoi hopes that for
Afghanistan and Pakistan. He would report through her
us it will be the mounting dissension, impatience, and
to the president. Obama was already a historic figure, a
frustration caused by a protracted war without fronts or
democratic prince, the John F. Kennedy of a new
other visible signs of success; a growing need to choose
generation. Holbrooke had worked for every Democratic
between guns and butter; and an increasing American
president since Kennedy. He badly wanted to win the
repugnance at finding, for the first time, their own
trust of this one. He thought that the president should
country cast as “the heavy” with massive fire power
approve the troops, not just because of the eroding
brought to bear against a “small Asian nation.” North
situation in Afghanistan but to make good on his
Vietnam couldn’t defeat half a million American troops,
campaign rhetoric about the need to win in Afghanistan.
but it could drain the American public of the will to go
Holbrooke also thought that the military was trying to
on fighting. So Johnson had two choices. He could turn
squeeze the new president with deceptive numbers and
all of North and South Vietnam along with parts of
a rushed decision. He kept thinking about 1965. That
Cambodia and Laos into a free-fire zone and try to
was the year when Johnson, after being elected,
knock out the enemy before dissent at home grew too
increased the number of troops in Vietnam from 23,000
strong. Or he could win back the center at home, and
to 184,000. The parallels with 2009 and Obama were
thus more time—not with patriotic slogans and false
uncanny. On February 13, Holbrooke was in Kabul on
hopes, but by reducing the United States’ commitment.
his first trip to the region since his appointment. In the
The first option was unlikely to work, because Hanoi’s
Situation Room, the president and his advisers were
will to fight was inexhaustible. The second option might
meeting to make a final decision on the troops. Clinton
work, but it would require several steps. Johnson should
was giving a speech at the Asia Society and had asked
change the United States’ objective—from victory over
Holbrooke to fill in for her. He sat in a darkened room
communism to a South Vietnamese government that
in the U.S. embassy, connected by secure
could survive and deal with an ongoing communist
videoconference to the White House. It was past
threat. The United States should demand more of the
midnight in Kabul and Holbrooke was tired. When
South Vietnamese, militarily and politically. It should
Obama called on him, he began to read from notes he’d
look to its own moral values and stop using airpower
written down in a lined copybook. “Let me speak on
and artillery that killed large numbers of civilians or
Secretary Clinton’s behalf, and at her direct instructions,
turned them into refugees in order to eliminate a few
16
in support of Option 2.” This was the option to send was as intolerable to Obama as flattery. He liked young,
17,000 combat troops in one deployment rather than smart, ultraloyal staffers. He didn’t like big competitive
splitting them up into two tranches. “We do so with personalities. The divide between the two men began
reluctance, and mindful of the difficulties entailed in any with temperament, widened with generation, and ended
troop deployment. This is a difficult decision, especially in outlook. Obama—half Kenyan, raised in Indonesia,
at a time when Afghanistan faces a political and Pakistani friends in college—saw himself as the first
constitutional crisis over its own elections that further president who understood the United States from the
complicates your decision. As your first decision to send outside in. He grasped the limits to American power and
troops overseas and into combat—as opposed to knew that not every problem had an American solution.
Iraq—this decision lies at the savage intersection of The Bush administration, and Clinton’s before it, had
policy, politics, and history.” “Who talks like this?” fallen prey to the hubris of a lone superpower. Then
Obama murmured. He sounded genuinely puzzled. came the Iraq war and the economic collapse of 2008,
Everyone around the Situation Room table heard him, and a reckoning required the country to sober up.
but Holbrooke, 7,000 miles away, didn’t hear and kept Obama wouldn’t say so, but his task was to manage
going. “It is in many ways strange to send more American decline, which meant using power wisely. He
American troops into such a potentially chaotic political embodied—his long slender fingers pressed skeptically
situation. If we send more troops, of course we deepen against his cheek as he listened from the head of the
our commitment, with no guarantee of success. And the table in the Situation Room—the very opposite of the
shadow of Vietnam hovers over us.” Obama interrupted baggy grandiosity that thought the United States could
him. “Richard, what are you doing? Are you reading do anything and the craven fear of being called weak for
something?” Holbrooke, onscreen, explained that the not trying. Obama probably wasn’t thinking of the
secretary had wanted to be sure the president heard her Berlin airlift or the Dayton peace accords, which
views accurately. He continued, “But if we do not send Holbrooke had negotiated and which had ended the
more troops, the chances of both political chaos and Bosnian war; Obama was thinking of the impulses that
Taliban success increase.” “Why are you reading?” had sunk the United States in Vietnam and Iraq. The
Obama insisted. Holbrooke stopped to explain again. He president and his aides believed these were Holbrooke’s
managed to get through the rest of his notes, which impulses too, when in fact he was only saying, “Be
could have been summed up in a couple of lines. But he careful. It could happen to you.” Obama didn’t want to
had lost the president. He didn’t understand what he’d hear it—couldn’t hear it, because the speaker kept
done wrong, only that Obama sounded annoyed and distracting him with theatrics and bombast worthy of
ignored him for the rest of the meeting. Holbrooke Johnson himself. So Obama told Jones, and Jones told
regretted reading his notes aloud. He’d done so in order Clinton, and Clinton told Holbrooke: stop it with
not to ramble on, but it had sounded like a speech or a Vietnam. “They don’t think they have anything to learn
first draft of his memoirs. A few younger people seated from Vietnam,” she said. “They’re going to make the
back against the walls found it exciting to hear this old same mistakes!” Holbrooke replied. Holbrooke
lion talk about savage intersections, but no one around confessed to his friend Gelb that even Clinton wasn’t
the table wanted to be addressed like that, and when interested. He tried to stop, but it was impossible. How
Obama expressed irritation they could only conclude could he not be haunted? There was nothing new under
that Holbrooke was already out of favor with the new the sun. Somehow, after a half-century excursion across
president. Which meant that nobody had to worry about the heights of American greatness, the country had
him. After the meeting, Obama told his national security returned to the exact same place. All the questions in
adviser, James Jones, that he would tolerate Holbrooke Afghanistan had been the questions in Vietnam. Could
in the Situation Room only if he kept his remarks short, the United States transform Afghan society? If not,
and that he wanted to be in Holbrooke’s presence as could Americans still win the war? Did our very effort
little as possible. The heart of the matter was Vietnam. make it less likely? What leverage did we have? Should
Holbrooke brought it up all the time. He couldn’t resist. we get rid of the Afghan leader? Could we talk our way
He passed around copies of a book he’d recently out? “It is beyond ironic that 40+ years later we are
reviewed, Lessons in Disaster, about the fatally flawed back in Vietnam,” Holbrooke wrote in his diary. “Of
decisions that led to escalation. He invoked the critical course, everything is different—and everything is the
months of 1965 so portentously that Obama once asked same. And somehow, I am back in the middle of it, the
him, “Is that the way people used to talk in the Johnson only senior official who really lived it. I had not thought
administration?” It wasn’t just that Holbrooke was much about it for years, now it comes back every day.
becoming a Vietnam bore, a sodden old vet staggering Every program has its prior incarnation—mostly
out of the triple-canopy jungle to grab strangers by the unsuccessful. . . . I think we must recognize that military
shirtfront and make them listen to his harrowing tale. success is not possible, + we must seek a negotiation.
Obama actually didn’t want to hear about Vietnam. He But with who? The Taliban are not Hanoi, + their
told his young aides that it wasn’t relevant, and they alliance with Al Qaeda is a deal?breaker.” Here was the
agreed: Vietnam was ancient history. Obama was three paradox: he knew from Vietnam that what the United
years old in July 1965. And what was Obama supposed States was doing in Afghanistan wouldn’t work—but he
to do with the analogy? It didn’t tell him how many thought he could do it anyway. And there was
more troops could make a difference in Helmand something else. If he applied the real lesson of
Province. It told him that his presidency might be Vietnam—don’t—he would be out of a job. And then
destroyed by this war. It was the note of doom in the who would he be? Over time, he learned to save
Situation Room. It turned Holbrooke into a lecturer, Vietnam for his staff. One day, as he sat through
condescending to the less experienced man, and that another White House meeting on Afghanistan, listening
17
to another optimistic military briefing, a quote surfaced better? We might need to send more troops in a year or
from the deep past, and he scribbled it down on a scrap two. What if our presence makes it bigger and better?
of paper and took it back to the office to show his young We’ll begin to transfer responsibility to the Afghan
aides, who of course had no idea where it came from: government in two to three years. What if the Afghan
“How can we lose when we’re so sincere?” In the fall of president, Hamid Karzai, wants us to stick around for
2009, Obama faced another decision on troops. His new the fat contracts and the combat brigades while his
commander in Afghanistan, General Stanley McChrystal, government continues to prey on the people?
was asking for 40,000 troops in addition to the earlier Counterinsurgency can only succeed with a reliable
21,000. The latest increase would put the total number partner, and the election did Karzai’s legitimacy great
of U.S. forces in Afghanistan at more than 100,000. harm. What if the Afghan government lacks the ability
McChrystal had been in Afghanistan since June, or will to win the support of the people? There’s no good
traveling around the country, learning the state of the answer. And what if the Pakistani military will never
war, and he had come to a conclusion: without a surge, change its strategy? There’s no good answer. Holbrooke
Afghanistan would go into what he called “a death sat at the far end of the table, next to General David
spiral.” McChrystal’s troop request had leaked, and Petraeus with his four stars, and took notes. Among his
Obama and his advisers felt boxed in again by the notes were private interjections. When McChrystal
military. Over ten weeks in the fall of 2009, Obama showed a slide that changed his definition of the
presided at no fewer than nine sessions of his National American goal from “defeat the Taliban” to “the
Security Council, two or three hours at a time. In his Taliban-led insurgency no longer poses an existential
diary, Holbrooke once called the Situation Room “a threat to the government of Afghanistan,” without
room that, to me, symbolizes the problem; a windowless changing the number of troops, Holbrooke wrote: “Wow!
below-ground room in which the distance from real Words can be used to mean whatever we want them to
knowledge to people is at its very greatest—very mean.” Susan Rice, the U.S. ambassador to the United
high-ranking people who know very little make grand Nations, proposed joint U.S.-Chinese aid programs in
(or not so grand) decisions, or maybe (as in the Clinton Pakistan: “NONSENSE.” Robert Gates, the secretary of
years so often) no decisions at all.” There had been an defense, argued that civilian aid to Pakistan might cause
Afghanistan strategy review in the last months of the a backlash against the United States: “THIS IS
Bush administration, and there had been another in NONSENSE!” Vice President Joe Biden said that every
Obama’s first weeks in office, and here they were again, one of Pakistan’s interests was also America’s interest:
this time a marathon review: a sure sign of a troubled “HUH?” Holbrooke kept the caustic skepticism to
war, like the many fact-finding missions Kennedy had himself. He no longer gave speeches or read from notes.
sent to South Vietnam. The discussion ran up against He complimented the president less often. He spoke
the fundamental contradictions of the war. Obama knew very little, and when he did, it was on subjects that were
them as well as anyone. Around and around they went part of his job but peripheral to the main
in the Situation Room as the weeks dragged on and discussion—agriculture and police corruption. He
Obama, crisp and lawyerly, listened and asked hard advocated a “civilian surge”—the State Department’s
questions. Let’s get started. Why are we in Afghanistan? plan to recruit more than a thousand American experts
Because al Qaeda attacked us from Afghanistan. Our and deploy them to Afghanistan’s cities and districts.
objective is to prevent another attack, and ultimately to The civilian surge gave Holbrooke a place at the table
destroy al Qaeda. If the Taliban take power again in and credibility with the generals, who were always
Afghanistan, al Qaeda could regain its safe haven there. complaining that the civilian effort lagged behind. So at
not to mention in Somalia and Yemen and the African the White House he was careful not to say what he really
Sahel. Why do we need 100,000 troops and a thought—but back at the office, when his adviser on aid,
counterinsurgency campaign in Afghanistan to go after Sepideh Keyvanshad, who did not believe that more was
100 al Qaeda members in the tribal areas of Pakistan? better in Afghanistan, asked him, “Why are we sending
Pakistan, our supposed ally, is actually supporting our all these people? It won’t make any difference,”
enemies. The Pakistanis won’t stand for American Holbrooke shot back, “You don’t think I know that?” In
troops on their soil. All we can do is covert ops, the 1990s, during meetings on the war in Bosnia,
intelligence collection, drone strikes in the tribal areas Holbrooke had said whatever he believed—hadn’t
against militants, some of whom are attacking Pakistani hesitated to contradict his boss, Secretary of State
targets—even that is very unpopular. What do we really Warren Christopher, or even President Clinton, when he
know about the Taliban? Are we sure they will allow al thought they were wrong. Now, in the 47th year of his
Qaeda back into Afghanistan? No, but they refuse to career, he grew careful. He felt that he didn’t have the
renounce al Qaeda. Why not do a counterterrorism standing with Obama to go up against the military, least
campaign: drones and a few thousand Special Forces of all the famous general sitting just to his left. He had
and spies going after the hard-core bad guys? That’s no supporters in the room except Hillary Clinton, and
what we’ve been trying since 2001, and it hasn’t worked. because he was wounded, and his need for her was
Only counterinsurgency will give the Afghan existential, he couldn’t allow a glimmer of light or a
government the breathing space to win the support of breath of air between them. And she was with the
the people and gain strength until it can defend itself. generals. As a result, almost no one knew what
But classic counterinsurgency requires hundreds of Holbrooke thought of the surge. He kept it from his
thousands of troops. So we’ll limit ourselves to colleagues and his staff. On Columbus Day weekend, he
protecting population centers and key lines of stayed up one night till four in the morning drafting a
communication until the Afghan army gets bigger and nine-page memo for Clinton. He rewrote it several times
better. What if the enemy keeps getting bigger and in the following days, still not satisfied. It goes straight
18
back to the memo he wrote for Johnson in the fall of uncontrollable events that could seriously damage our
1967, the one about Napoleon’s Russia campaign. It has most vital interests,” he wrote. It was a kind of soft
the same clarity, the same ice-blue gaze at a difficult domino theory—not that neighboring governments
reality. Like you, I believe in the possibilities of would topple one after another, but the whole region
American leadership, and I am not a pessimist by nature. stretching from the Middle East to India, with nuclear
I hope my judgments are wrong. In 1965, over the weapons and numerous insurgencies and jihadist
course of a week, Lyndon Johnson had the same kind of groups, would be destabilized. Instead of a way out,
discussions we are having now, but came up with the Holbrooke was seeking a policy that allowed the United
wrong answers. In 2002–3 George W. Bush never even States to stay. The country didn’t want to hear this, and
really consulted his own Secretary of State before neither did Obama, but Americans needed to be
committing himself to the Iraq war. Now it is our turn, long-distance runners in Afghanistan. That was why
and Barack Obama deserves credit for having lengthy Holbrooke kept saying it would be the longest American
discussions and listening to everyone before making his war. A big surge promised too much, to both Americans
decisions. But the parameters of the debate have been and Afghans, and would soon play out in predictable
defined almost entirely by the military, and I do not ways, with calls for yet more troops or a rapid departure.
believe the full political, regional, and global A more modest number—Holbrooke settled on 20,000
implications of McChrystal’s requests have been to 25,000, just one combat brigade and the rest trainers
adequately discussed. Holbrooke believed that and advisers to the Afghan army—would hold off the
counterinsurgency would never succeed in Afghanistan. Taliban and the American public while giving a new
Historically it had worked in colonial wars, where it political strategy time to work. “And time, the
required a lot of coercion, and in wars where the enemy commodity we need most to succeed, is in the shortest
had no cross-border sanctuary. In Iraq, Petraeus’ supply.” More time— that had been the theme of his
counterinsurgency strategy had depended on specific Napoleon-in-Russia memo, too. What would a political
political developments in the Shiite and Sunni strategy look like? That part wasn’t clear—solutions for
communities. The analogy for Afghanistan was none of Afghanistan were never as persuasive as critiques.
these. It was Vietnam, the war that had been barred Holbrooke included a brief, vague paragraph on
from discussion. Rather than securing the Afghan “reintegration and reconciliation”—“the biggest missing
population, 100,000 U.S. troops would only confirm the piece of our policy.” Reintegration meant bringing in
Taliban narrative of an infidel army of occupation low-level Taliban defectors. Reconciliation meant
supporting a puppet government. Everyone said that talking to the Taliban leadership. But Clinton didn’t
this was a political war, but Holbrooke pointed out that want to hear of peace talks, and neither did the military,
the review had ignored politics—the election disaster, and neither did the White House. Talking to the
the cancer of corruption, Karzai’s illegitimacy. The enemy—the only way to end the war—was never part of
discussions had focused almost entirely on troop the strategy review.
numbers—but what kind of government would tens of
NEW YORK AND WASHINGTON
thousands of new troops be sent to support? “The
2010 Yesterday I went to the final performance of the
current government does not have sufficient legitimacy
revival of South Pacific at Lincoln Center. A fantastic
and appeal to motivate hundreds of thousands of
production, which I found immensely moving. Men
Afghans to die for it,” he wrote. “While a substantial
were crying, myself included. I tried to understand why
portion of the Afghan population is strongly motivated
that show had such an enormous emotional impact on
to fight the Taliban, their principal motivation is usually
us. For me it was the combination of the beauty of the
ethnic and tribal, not any commitment to the values
show and its music, and the capturing in that show of so
supposedly represented by the government in Kabul.”
many moments in American history, the show itself
He wasn’t arguing against sending more troops—not in
opening in New York at the height of New York’s
a memo to Clinton, anyway. (He told Gelb privately that
greatness, 1949, the theme—Americans at war in a
if it were up to him, they’d send just 4,500 advisers, but
distant land or islands in the South Pacific—the sense of
he couldn’t tell Clinton that, not even discreetly.) A U.S.
loss of American optimism and our feeling that we could
withdrawal from Afghanistan would “set off a cycle of
do anything.
The contrast with today—it was very powerful, and I counterinsurgency is the answer. By classic
kept thinking of where we were today, our nation, our counterinsurgency he means what he wrote about in his
lack of confidence in our own ability to lead compared doctrine. I don’t believe it will work here any more than
to where we were in 1949 when it came out, evoking an it did in other places. They can talk about the Algerian
era only five years or seven years earlier, when we had or Moroccan or Malaysian or Philippine models all they
gone to the most distant corners of the globe and saved want, but it won’t work here because of the sanctuary
civilization. Even though the chances of success in any that is Pakistan, and because of the incompetence of the
kind of dialogue with the Taliban are very small—I put it government, because we don’t have enough resources
at 10 to 20 percent—it would be irresponsible of us not and we don’t have enough time, and because the
to try given the fact that there’s no military solution to president is going to start drawing down troops next
the war and given the fact that we are in a harsh spiral year. Petraeus is gambling that his brilliance—and he’s
right now, a declining relationship with Karzai and at undeniably brilliant—will trigger an outcome which will
home. The bottom is falling out of this policy as we decimate the enemy, and then they will in effect fade
speak, and everybody knows it. The only way to deal away. Highly unlikely. When I went up to see [Obama’s
with it, in my view, is to seek a political solution. senior adviser David] Axelrod, I said as I was leaving,
Petraeus, on the other hand, believes deeply that classic “David, I know you don’t want to hear this again from
19
me, but the president is the only person in the that will determine the rest of the course of the war. It’s
Administration at a high level who I haven’t ever given the president’s last chance to turn away from the
my views to directly and candidly, and I hope we can problems that are faced. We are going to try to get them
correct that.” He just nodded. This has been my greatest to make one effort at what we call reconciliation. That’s
frustration, though I do not believe that if I saw him I really a euphemism for seeing if there’s the basis for a
would actually make a difference. At least, however, I political settlement with the odious Taliban. But since a
would have fulfilled my obligation to him. The question military victory is impossible, we have to make that
constantly arises—I ask it of myself, friends ask search. On December 10, 2010, during a meeting in
me—how long do you want to do this? My answer is Clinton’s office, Holbrooke suffered a torn aorta. He
simple: as long as I can make a difference. We’re now died three days later, at the age of 69. Negotiations
embarked on the most difficult period in terms of between the United States and the Taliban began the
formulation of policy. Since last year, we’re shaping the following year, but the war in Afghanistan continues to
policy, as I wrote Hillary in my memo last week, in ways this day. (Foreign Affairs, April 16, 2019)
The Self-Destruction of American Power by Fareed Zakaria

Sometime in the last two years, American hegemony dominated by the dollar, the yen, and the deutsche mark.
died. The age of U.S. dominance was a brief, heady era, Henry Kissinger’s 1994 book, Diplomacy, predicted the
about three decades marked by two moments, each a dawn of a new multipolar age. Certainly in the United
breakdown of sorts. It was born amid the collapse of the States, there was little triumphalism. The 1992
Berlin Wall, in 1989. The end, or really the beginning of presidential campaign was marked by a sense of
the end, was another collapse, that of Iraq in 2003, and weakness and weariness. “The Cold War is over; Japan
the slow unraveling since. But was the death of the and Germany won,” the Democratic hopeful Paul
United States’ extraordinary status a result of external Tsongas said again and again. Asia hands had already
causes, or did Washington accelerate its own demise begun to speak of “the Pacific century.” U.S. hegemony
through bad habits and bad behavior? That is a question in the post–Cold War era was like nothing the world
that will be debated by historians for years to come. But had seen since the Roman Empire. There was one
at this point, we have enough time and perspective to exception to this analysis, a prescient essay in the pages
make some preliminary observations. As with most of this magazine by the conservative commentator
deaths, many factors contributed to this one. There were Charles Krauthammer: “The Unipolar Moment,” which
deep structural forces in the international system that was published in 1990. But even this triumphalist take
inexorably worked against any one nation that was limited in its expansiveness, as its title suggests.
accumulated so much power. In the American case, “The unipolar moment will be brief,” Krauthammer
however, one is struck by the ways in which admitted, predicting in a Washington Post column that
Washington—from an unprecedented position— within a very short time, Germany and Japan, the two
mishandled its hegemony and abused its power, losing emerging “regional superpowers,” would be pursuing
allies and emboldening enemies. And now, under the foreign policies independent of the United States.
Trump administration, the United States seems to have Policymakers welcomed the waning of unipolarity,
lost interest, indeed lost faith, in the ideas and purpose which they assumed was imminent. In 1991, as the
that animated its international presence for Balkan wars began, Jacques Poos, the president of the
three-quarters of a century. Council of the European Union, declared, “This is the
hour of Europe.” He explained: “If one problem can be
A STAR IS BORN
solved by Europeans, it is the Yugoslav problem. This is
U. S. hegemony in the post–Cold War era was like
a European country, and it is not up to the Americans.”
nothing the world had seen since the Roman Empire.
But it turned out that only the United States had the
Writers are fond of dating the dawn of “the American
combined power and influence to intervene effectively
century” to 1945, not long after the publisher Henry
and tackle the crisis. Similarly, toward the end of the
Luce coined the term. But the post–World War II era
1990s, when a series of economic panics sent East Asian
was quite different from the post-1989 one. Even after
economies into tailspins, only the United States could
1945, in large stretches of the globe, France and the
stabilize the global financial system. It organized a $120
United Kingdom still had formal empires and thus deep
billion international bailout for the worst-hit countries,
influence. Soon, the Soviet Union presented itself as a
resolving the crisis. Time magazine put three Americans,
superpower rival, contesting Washington’s influence in
Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin, Federal Reserve Chair
every corner of the planet. Remember that the phrase
Alan Greenspan, and Deputy Treasury Secretary
“Third World” derived from the tripartite division of the
Lawrence Summers, on its cover with the headline “The
globe, the First World being the United States and
Committee to Save the World.”
Western Europe, and the Second World, the communist
countries. The Third World was everywhere else, where THE BEGINNING OF THE END
each country was choosing between U.S. and Soviet Just as American hegemony grew in the early 1990s
influence. For much of the world’s population, from while no one was noticing, so in the late 1990s did the
Poland to China, the century hardly looked American. forces that would undermine it, even as people had
The United States’ post–Cold War supremacy was begun to speak of the United States as “the
initially hard to detect. As I pointed out in The New indispensable nation” and “the world’s sole
Yorker in 2002, most participants missed it. In 1990, superpower.” First and foremost, there was the rise of
British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher argued that China. It is easy to see in retrospect that Beijing would
the world was dividing into three political spheres, become the only serious rival to Washington, but it was
20
not as apparent a quarter century ago. Although China more international agreements than any previous
had grown speedily since the 1980s, it had done so from administration had. (Undoubtedly, that record has now
a very low base. Few countries had been able to continue been surpassed under President Donald Trump.)
that process for more than a couple of decades. China’s American behavior abroad during the Bush
strange mixture of capitalism and Leninism seemed administration shattered the moral and political
fragile, as the Tiananmen Square uprising had revealed. authority of the United States, as long-standing allies
But China’s rise persisted, and the country became the such as Canada and France found themselves at odds
new great power on the block, one with the might and with it on the substance, morality, and style of its
the ambition to match the United States. Russia, for its foreign policy.
part, went from being both weak and quiescent in the
OWN GOAL
early 1990s to being a revanchist power, a spoiler with
So which was it that eroded American hegemony—the
enough capability and cunning to be disruptive. With
rise of new challengers or imperial overreach? As with
two major global players outside the U.S.-constructed
any large and complex historical phenomenon, it was
international system, the world had entered a
probably all of the above. China’s rise was one of those
post-American phase. Today, the United States is still
tectonic shifts in international life that would have
the most powerful country on the planet, but it exists in
eroded any hegemon’s unrivaled power, no matter how
a world of global and regional powers that can—and
skillful its diplomacy. The return of Russia, however,
frequently do—push back. The 9/11 attacks and the rise
was a more complex affair. It’s easy to forget now, but in
of Islamic terrorism played a dual role in the decline of
the early 1990s, leaders in Moscow were determined to
U.S. hegemony. At first, the attacks seemed to galvanize
turn their country into a liberal democracy, a European
Washington and mobilize its power. In 2001, the United
nation, and an ally of sorts of the West. Eduard
States, still larger economically than the next five
Shevardnadze, who was foreign minister during the
countries put together, chose to ramp up its annual
final years of the Soviet Union, supported the United
defense spending by an amount—almost $50
States’ 1990–91 war against Iraq. And after the Soviet
billion—that was larger than the United Kingdom’s
Union’s collapse, Russia’s first foreign minister, Andrei
entire yearly defense budget. When Washington
Kozyrev, was an even more ardent liberal, an
intervened in Afghanistan, it was able to get
internationalist, and a vigorous supporter of human
overwhelming support for the campaign, including from
rights. The greatest error the United States committed
Russia. Two years later, despite many objections, it was
during its unipolar moment was to simply stop paying
still able to put together a large international coalition
attention. Who lost Russia is a question for another
for an invasion of Iraq. The early years of this century
article. But it is worth noting that although Washington
marked the high point of the American imperium, as
gave Moscow some status and respect—expanding the
Washington tried to remake wholly alien
G- 7 into the G-8, for example—it never truly took
nations—Afghanistan and Iraq—thousands of miles
Russia’s security concerns seriously. It enlarged NATO
away, despite the rest of the world’s reluctant
fast and furiously, a process that might have been
acquiescence or active opposition. Iraq in particular
necessary for countries such as Poland, historically
marked a turning point. The United States embarked on
insecure and threatened by Russia, but one that has
a war of choice despite misgivings expressed in the rest
continued on unthinkingly, with little concern for
of world. It tried to get the UN to rubber-stamp its
Russian sensitivities, and now even extends to
mission, and when that proved arduous, it dispensed
Macedonia. Today, Russian President Vladimir Putin’s
with the organization altogether. It ignored the Powell
aggressive behavior makes every action taken against
Doctrine—the idea, promulgated by General Colin
his country seem justified, but it’s worth asking, What
Powell while he was chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
forces produced the rise of Putin and his foreign policy
during the Gulf War, that a war was worth entering only
in the first place? Undoubtedly, they were mostly
if vital national interests were at stake and
internal to Russia, but to the extent that U.S. actions
overwhelming victory assured. The Bush administration
had an effect, they appear to have been damaging,
insisted that the vast challenge of occupying Iraq could
helping stoke the forces of revenge and revanchism in
be undertaken with a small number of troops and a light
Russia. The greatest error the United States committed
touch. Iraq, it was said, would pay for itself. And once in
during its unipolar moment, with Russia and more
Baghdad, Washington decided to destroy the Iraqi state,
generally, was to simply stop paying attention. After the
disbanding the army and purging the bureaucracy,
collapse of the Soviet Union, Americans wanted to go
which produced chaos and helped fuel an insurgency.
home, and they did. During the Cold War, the United
Any one of these mistakes might have been overcome.
States had stayed deeply interested in events in Central
But together they ensured that Iraq became a costly
America, Southeast Asia, the Taiwan Strait, and even
fiasco. After 9/11, Washington made major,
Angola and Namibia. By the mid-1990s, it had lost all
consequential decisions that continue to haunt it, but it
interest in the world. Foreign-bureau broadcasts by
made all of them hastily and in fear. It saw itself as in
NBC fell from 1,013 minutes in 1988 to 327 minutes in
mortal danger, needing to do whatever it took to defend
1996. (Today, the three main networks combined devote
itself—from invading Iraq to spending untold sums on
roughly the same amount of time to foreignbureau
homeland security to employing torture. The rest of the
stories as each individual network did in 1988.) Both the
world saw a country that was experiencing a kind of
White House and Congress during the George H. W.
terrorism that many had lived with for years and yet was
Bush administration had no appetite for an ambitious
thrashing around like a wounded lion, tearing down
effort to transform Russia, no interest in rolling out a
international alliances and norms. In its first two years,
new version of the Marshall Plan or becoming deeply
the George W. Bush administration walked away from
21
engaged in the country. Even amid the foreign economic control of its empire through overreach and hubris. In
crises that hit during the Clinton administration, U.S. 1900, with a quarter of the world’s population under
policymakers had to scramble and improvise, knowing British rule, most of the United Kingdom’s major
that Congress would appropriate no funds to rescue colonies were asking only for limited autonomy—
Mexico or Thailand or Indonesia. They offered advice, “dominion status” or “home rule,” in the terms of the
most of it designed to require little assistance from day. Had the country quickly granted that to all its
Washington, but their attitude was one of a distant colonies, who knows whether it would have been able to
well-wisher, not an engaged superpower. Ever since the extend its imperial life for decades? But it didn’t,
end of World War I, the United States has wanted to insisting on its narrow, selfish interests rather than
transform the world. In the 1990s, that seemed more accommodating itself to the interests of the broader
possible than ever before. Countries across the planet empire. There is an analogy here with the United States.
were moving toward the American way. The Gulf War Had the country acted more consistently in the pursuit
seemed to mark a new milestone for world order, in that of broader interests and ideas, it could have continued
it was prosecuted to uphold a norm, limited in its scope, its influence for decades (albeit in a different form). The
endorsed by major powers and legitimized by rule for extending liberal hegemony seems simple: be
international law. But right at the time of all these more liberal and less hegemonic. But too often and too
positive developments, the United States lost interest. obviously, Washington pursued its narrow self-interests,
U.S. policymakers still wanted to transform the world in alienating its allies and emboldening its foes. Unlike the
the 1990s, but on the cheap. They did not have the United Kingdom at the end of its reign, the United
political capital or resources to throw themselves into States is not bankrupt or imperially overextended. It
the effort. That was one reason Washington’s advice to remains the single most powerful country on the planet.
foreign countries was always the same: economic shock It will continue to wield immense influence, more than
therapy and instant democracy. Anything slower or any other nation. But it will no longer define and
more complex—anything, in other words, that dominate the international system the way it did for
resembled the manner in which the West itself had almost three decades. What remains, then, are
liberalized its economy and democratized its American ideas. The United States has been a unique
politics—was unacceptable. Before 9/11, when hegemon in that it expanded its influence to establish a
confronting challenges, the American tactic was mostly new world order, one dreamed of by President
to attack from afar, hence the twin approaches of Woodrow Wilson and most fully conceived of by
economic sanctions and precision air strikes. Both of President Franklin Roosevelt. It is the world that was
these, as the political scientist Eliot Cohen wrote of half-created after 1945, sometimes called “the liberal
airpower, had the characteristics of modern courtship: international order,” from which the Soviet Union soon
“gratification without commitment.” Of course, these defected to build its own sphere. But the free world
limits on the United States’ willingness to pay prices and persisted through the Cold War, and after 1991, it
bear burdens never changed its rhetoric, which is why, expanded to encompass much of the globe. The ideas
in an essay for The New York Times Magazine in 1998, I behind it have produced stability and prosperity over
pointed out that U.S. foreign policy was defined by “the the last three-quarters of a century. The question now is
rhetoric of transformation but the reality of whether, as American power wanes, the international
accommodation.” The result, I said, was “a hollow system it sponsored—the rules, norms, and values—will
hegemony.” That hollowness has persisted ever since. survive. Or will America also watch the decline of its
empire of ideas? (Foreign Affairs, June 11, 2019)
THE FINAL BLOW
The Trump administration has hollowed out U.S.
foreign policy even further. Trump’s instincts are
Jacksonian, in that he is largely uninterested in the
world except insofar as he believes that most countries
are screwing the United States. He is a nationalist, a
protectionist, and a populist, determined to put
“America first.” But truthfully, more than anything else,
he has abandoned the field. Under Trump, the United
States has withdrawn from the Trans-Pacific
Partnership and from engaging with Asia more generally.
It is uncoupling itself from its 70-year partnership with
Europe. It has dealt with Latin America through the
prism of either keeping immigrants out or winning votes
in Florida. It has even managed to alienate Canadians
(no mean feat). And it has subcontracted Middle East
policy to Israel and Saudi Arabia. With a few impulsive
exceptions—such as the narcissistic desire to win a
Nobel Prize by trying to make peace with North
Korea—what is most notable about Trump’s foreign
policy is its absence. When the United Kingdom was the
superpower of its day, its hegemony eroded because of
many large structural forces—the rise of Germany, the
United States, and the Soviet Union. But it also lost
22
“Let us not suffer from a national amnesia that causes us to forget who and what
we are.” – Meir Kahane
Public amnesia is a common theme in the political history of every nation. One thing
that people learn from history is that they learn nothing. Nowadays, the White
House is under the occupation of a populist president, Mr Donald Trump. Among
many other regressive policies that he want to implement includes a more strict
policy on immigration to the United States of America. What is ironic is the fact that
the present day America is a composition of different immigrants from the rest of the
world irrespective of ones colour. Coming to 21st century American attitude towards
immigration changed a lot. Presidents irrespective of what party they belonged to in
the past had adopted harsh approach on immigration. Former president, Barack
Obama, favourite of many white liberals, holds worse record than Trump on
immigration. While Trump rightly deserves admonition for separating children from
their immigrant families as such actions tear families apart, very few criticised
Obama for doing the same. Under Obama administration, the US official detained
more than 90,000 children. Obama holds the record for deporting more immigrants
than any president, with more than 2 million deportations over eight years. Trump is
carrying forward the mission of closing the American lands to immigrants from
where Obama left it. One can say it with ease that the effects of Trump’s “zero
tolerance” policy for prosecuting illegal entry this spring are reminiscent, for those
who have been following the immigration phenomenon for a while, of what the
Obama administration did in 2014.
23
Putin, the Great by Susan B. Glasser
Russia’s Imperial Impostor
In January 27, 2018, Vladimir Putin became the now, when Putin faces the paradox of his own extended
longest-serving leader of Russia since Joseph Stalin. rule, defined by great length but also by perpetual
There were no parades or fireworks, no embarrassingly insecurity.
gilded statues unveiled or unseemly displays of nuclear
SURVIVOR: RUSSIA
missiles in Red Square. After all, Putin did not want to
Insecurity might seem the wrong word for it: Putin is
be compared with Leonid Brezhnev, the bushybrowed
well into his 20th year as Russia’s leader and in some
septuagenarian whose record in power he had just
ways appears to be at his most powerful, the global
surpassed. Brezhnev, who ruled the Soviet Union from
template for a new era of modern authoritarians. In the
1964 to 1982, was the leader of Putin’s gritty youth, of
early years of this century, when the post-Soviet wave of
the long stagnation that preceded the empire’s collapse.
democratization still seemed inexorable, Putin reversed
By the end, he was the butt of a million jokes, the
Russia’s course, restoring centralized authority in the
doddering grandfather of a doddering state, the
Kremlin and reviving the country’s standing in the
conductor of a Russian train to nowhere. “Stalin proved
world. Today, in Washington and certain capitals of
that just one person could manage the country,” went
Europe, he is an all-purpose villain, sanctioned and
one of those many jokes. “Brezhnev proved that a
castigated for having invaded two neighbors—Georgia
country doesn’t need to be managed at all.” Putin, a
and Ukraine—and for having provoked Western
ruler at a time when management, or at least the
countries, including by interfering in the 2016 U.S.
appearance thereof, is required, prefers other models.
presidential election in favor of Donald Trump and
The one he has liked the longest is, immodestly, Peter
using deadly nerve agents to poison targets on British
the Great. In the obscurity and criminality of post-Soviet
soil. His military intervention in Syria’s civil war helped
St. Petersburg in the 1990s, when Putin was deputy
save the regime of Bashar al-Assad, making Putin the
mayor, he chose to hang on his office wall a portrait of
most significant Russian player in the Middle East since
the modernizing tsar who built that city on the bones of
Brezhnev. His increasingly close alliance with China has
a thousand serfs to be his country’s “window to the
helped usher in a new era of great-power competition
West.” By that point in his career, Putin was no
with the United States. Finally, it appears, Putin has
Romanov, only an unknown former lieutenant colonel
brought about the multipolar world that he has
in the KGB who had masqueraded as a translator, a
dreamed of since he took office determined to revisit the
diplomat, and a university administrator, before ending
Americans’ Cold War victory. All that, and he is only 66
up as the unlikely right-hand man of St. Petersburg’s
years old, seemingly vigorous and healthy and capable
first-ever democratically elected mayor. Putin had
of governing for many more years to come. His state is
grown up so poor in the city’s mean postwar courtyards
no Brezhnevian gerontocracy, at least not yet. An
that his autobiography speaks of fighting off “hordes of
enormous struggle for post-Putin Russia has already
rats” in the hallway of the communal apartment where
begun. But if Putin has aspired to be a ruthless modern
he and his parents lived in a single room with no hot
tsar, he is not the all-seeing, allpowerful one he is often
water or stove. Peter the Great had no business being his
portrayed to be. He is an elected leader, even if those
model, but there he was, and there he has remained.
elections are shams, and his latest term in office will run
Earlier this summer, in a long and boastful interview
out in 2024, when he is constitutionally required to step
with the Financial Times in which he celebrated the
aside, unless he has the constitution changed again to
decline of Western-style liberalism and the West’s “no
extend his tenure (a possibility the Kremlin has already
longer tenable” embrace of multiculturalism, Putin
raised). Putin has struggled at home far more than his
answered unhesitatingly when asked which world leader
swaggering on the world stage suggests. He controls the
he admired most. “Peter the Great,” he replied. “But he
broadcast media, the parliament, the courts, and the
is dead,” the Financial Times’ editor, Lionel Barber, said.
security services, the last of which have seen their
“He will live as long as his cause is alive,” Putin
influence metastasize to practically Soviet-era levels
responded. No matter how contrived his admiration for
under his rule. Yet since winning his latest fake election,
Peter the Great, Putin has in fact styled himself a tsar as
in 2018, with 77 percent of the vote, his approval ratings
much as a Soviet general secretary over the course of his
have declined precipitously. In a poll this past spring,
two decades in public life. The religion he grew up
just 32 percent of Russians surveyed said they trusted
worshiping was not the Marxist-Leninist ideology he
him, according to the state pollster, the lowest level of
was force-fed in school but the heroic displays of
his long tenure, until the Kremlin demanded a
superpower might he saw on television and the imperial
methodological change, and his approval rating now
grandeur of his faded but still ambitious hometown,
stands in the mid-60s, off from a high of close to 90
Peter’s town. Strength was and is his dogma, whether
percent after his 2014 annexation of Crimea. The
for countries or men, and the Russian emperors’ motto
subsequent war he unleashed through proxies in eastern
“Orthodoxy, Autocracy, Nationality” is a closer
Ukraine has stalemated. Protests are a regular feature of
philosophical fit with today’s Putinism than the Soviet
Russian cities today—a decision to raise the retirement
paeans to international workers’ solidarity and the
age last year was particularly unpopular—and a genuine
heroism of the laborer that Putin had to memorize as a
opposition still exists, led by such figures as the
child. Brezhnev was not the model for Putin but the
anticorruption activist Alexei Navalny, despite years of
cautionary tale, and if that was true when Putin was a
state efforts to shut it down. Putin has no obvious
young KGB operative in the days of détente and decline
successor, and today’s Kremlinologists report an
in the 1970s and early 1980s, it is even more the case
increase in infighting among the security services and
24
the business class, suggesting that an enormous struggle perhaps the most memorable passage from Putin’s
for post-Putin Russia has already begun. At every stage 2000 as-told-to memoir, First Person, which remains
of Putin’s long, eventful, and unlikely rule, there have both the key source for understanding the Russian
been similar moments of uncertainty, and often there president’s history and a prescient document in which
has been an enormous gap between the analysis of those he laid out much of the political program he would soon
in distant capitals, who tend to see Putin as a classic start implementing. The revolution in East Germany, as
dictator, and those at home, who look at the president scarring as it was for Putin, turned out to be only the
and his government as a far more slapdash affair, where prelude to what he considered and still considers the
incompetence as well as luck, inertia as well as tyranny, greater catastrophe, the collapse and dissolution of the
has played a role. “Stagnation,” in fact, is no longer an Soviet Union itself, in 1991. This was the signal moment
automatic reference to Brezhnev in Russia anymore; of Putin’s adult life, the tragedy whose consequences he
increasingly, it is an epithet used to attack Putin and the is determined to undo. Putin was a KGB man in full, an
state of the nation, beset as it is by corruption, sanctions,
authoritarian modernizer, a believer in order and
economic backwardness, and an indeterminate program stability. Putin would go from his KGB posting in the
for doing anything about it all. At the end of 2018, backwater of Dresden to president of Russia in less than
Putin’s former finance minister, Alexei Kudrin, said that a decade, ascending to the Kremlin on New Year’s Eve
Russia’s economy was mired in a “serious stagnation in 1999 as Boris Yeltsin’s handpicked successor. Yeltsin,
pit.” As the economist Anders Aslund concludes in his aging and alcoholic, had brought democracy to Russia
new book, Russia’s Crony Capitalism, the country has after the Soviet collapse but had soured his country on
devolved into “an extreme form of plutocracy that the word itself, which had come to be associated with
requires authoritarianism to persist,” with Putin joining economic crisis, gangster rampages, and the crooked
in the looting to become a billionaire many times over giveaway of state assets to communist insiders turned
himself, even as his country has grown more isolated capitalists. By the end of his two terms in office, Yeltsin
because of his aggressive foreign policy. Sheer was barely able to speak in public and was surrounded
survival—of his regime and of himself—is often the aim by a corrupt “Family” of relatives and associates who
that best explains many of Putin’s political decisions, at feared they would face prosecution once they lost the
home and abroad. In 2012, when Putin returned to the protection of his high office. Putin had arrived in
presidency after a hiatus as prime minister so as to Moscow at an opportune moment, rising in just a few
observe constitutional niceties, he was greeted with years from an obscure job in Yeltsin’s presidential
massive demonstrations. These shook Putin to the core, administration to head of the postSoviet successor to
and his belief that street protests can all too easily turn the KGB, known as the Federal Security Service, or FSB.
into regime-threatening revolutions is the key to From there, he was appointed prime minister, one in a
understanding his present and future behavior. On the series of what had been up until then replaceable young
international stage, no cause has animated Putin more Yeltsin acolytes. Putin, however, was different,
than the prospect of another country’s leader being launching a brutal war in the breakaway republic of
forced from office, no matter how evil the leader or how Chechnya in response to a series of domestic terrorist
deserved the toppling. Early on in his presidency, he attacks whose murky origins continue to inspire
opposed the “color revolutions” sweeping some conspiracy theories about the FSB’s possible role. His
post-Soviet states: the 2003 Rose Revolution in Georgia, displays of macho activism transformed Russian politics,
the 2004 Orange Revolution in Ukraine, and the 2005 and Yeltsin’s advisers decided that this KGB
Tulip Revolution in Kyrgyzstan. He condemned the veteran—still only in his 40s—would be just the sort of
overthrow of Saddam Hussein in Iraq and Hosni loyalist who could protect them. In March 2000, Putin
Mubarak in Egypt and Muammar al-Qaddafi in Libya. won the first of what would be four presidential
He went to war after his ally Viktor Yanukovych, the elections. As in those that followed, there was no serious
president of Ukraine, fled the country amid a peaceful competition, and Putin never felt compelled to offer an
street uprising. He is an antirevolutionary through and electoral program or a policy platform. But his agenda
through, which makes sense when you remember how it from the start was both clear and acted on with
all began. breathtaking speed. In just over a year, Putin not only
continued to wage the war in Chechnya with unforgiving
FROM DRESDEN TO THE KREMLIN
force but also reinstated the Soviet national anthem,
The first revolution Putin experienced was a trauma that
ordered the government takeover of the only
he has never forgotten, the 1989 fall of the Berlin Wall
independent television network in Russia’s history,
and the resulting collapse of the communist regime in
passed a new flat tax on income and required Russians
East Germany. It happened when he was a 36-year-old
to actually pay it, and exiled powerful
undercover KGB operative stationed in Dresden, and
oligarchs—including Boris Berezovsky, who had helped
Putin and his men were left on their own to figure out
him come to power and would later suspiciously turn up
what to do as angry East Germans threatened to storm
dead in his British home. Over the next few years, Putin
their offices, burning papers “night and day,” as he
would further consolidate his authority, canceling
would later recall, while they waited for help. Putin had
elections for regional governors, eliminating political
already become disillusioned by the huge disparity
competition in the State Duma, and surrounding
between the higher standard of living in East Germany
himself with loyal advisers from the security services
and the poverty he was used to back home. Now, he saw
and St. Petersburg. He also, in 2004, arrested Mikhail
his country’s leadership, weak and uncertain, abandon
Khodorkovsky, Russia’s richest man, and seized his oil
him, too. “We cannot do anything without orders from
company in a politically charged prosecution that had
Moscow,” he was told. “And Moscow is silent.” This is
the intended effect of scaring Russia’s wealthy robber
25
barons into subservience. These actions, even at the he wouldn’t do it. In general, U.S. interpretations of
time, were not difficult to read. Putin was a KGB man in Putin’s Russia have been determined far more by the
full, an authoritarian modernizer, a believer in order politics of Washington than by what has actually been
and stability. And yet he was called a mystery, a cipher, happening in Moscow. Cold Warriors have looked
an ideological blank slate—“Mr. Nobody,” the backward and seen the Soviet Union 2.0. Others,
Kremlinologist Lilia Shevtsova dubbed him. Perhaps including Bush and Obama at the outset of their
only U.S. President George W. Bush found Putin to be presidencies and now Trump, have dreamed of a Russia
“very straightforward and trustworthy” after getting “a that could be a pragmatic partner for the West,
sense of his soul,” as he announced after their initial persisting in this despite the rapidly accumulating
2001 summit meeting in Slovenia, but Bush was not evidence of Putin’s aggressively revisionist, inevitably
alone in considering Putin a Western-oriented reformer zero-sum vision of a world in which Russia’s national
who, although certainly no democrat, might prove to be revival will succeed only at the expense of other states.
a reliable partner after Yeltsin’s embarrassing stumbles. There are many reasons why the West
At the World Economic Forum in Davos a year earlier, misunderestimated Putin, as Bush might have put it,
an American journalist had asked the new Russian but one stands out with the clarity of hindsight:
president point-blank, “Who is Mr. Putin?” But of Westerners simply had no framework for a world in
course, it was the wrong question. Everyone already which autocracy, not democracy, would be on the rise,
knew, or should have. Outsiders have always judged for a post–Cold War geopolitics in which revisionist
Russia on their own terms. In many ways, Putin has powers such as Russia and China would compete on
been strikingly consistent. The president who made more equal terms again with the United States. After the
headlines in 2004 by calling the breakup of the Soviet Soviet collapse, the United States had gotten used to the
Union “the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the idea of itself as the world’s sole superpower, and a
twentieth century” is the same president of today, the virtuous one at that. Understanding Putin and what he
one who told the Financial Times earlier this year that represents seems a lot easier today than it did then, now
“as for the tragedy related to the dissolution of the that the number of democracies in the world, by
Soviet Union, that is something obvious.” For Putin, the Freedom House’s count, has fallen each year for the past
goal of the state remains what it was when he came to 13 years. When Putin came to power, it seemed as
office two decades ago. It is not a policy program, not though the world was going in the opposite direction.
democracy or anything approaching it, but the absence Putin had to be an outlier. Russia was a declining power,
of something—namely, the upheaval that preceded him. “Upper Volta with nukes,” as critics used to call the
“Ultimately,” he said in the same interview, “the Soviet Union. Putin’s project of restoring order was
well-being of the people depends, possibly primarily, on necessary, and at least not a significant threat. How
stability.” It might as well have been his slogan for the could it be otherwise? On September 9, 2001, I and a
last 20 years. Where once there was chaos and collapse, few dozen other Moscow-based correspondents traveled
he claims to offer Russia confidence, self-sufficiency, to neighboring Belarus to observe the rigged elections in
and a “stable, normal, safe and predictable life.” Not a which Alexander Lukashenko was ensuring his
good life, or even a better one, not world domination or continuation as president. We treated the story as a
anything too grand, but a Russia that is reliable, stolid, Cold War relic; Lukashenko was “the last dictator in
intact. This may or may not continue to resonate with Europe,” as the headlines called him, a living Soviet
Russians as the collapse of the Soviet Union recedes anachronism. It was simply inconceivable to us that two
further and further from living memory. It is the decades later, both Lukashenko and Putin would still be
promise of a Brezhnev, or at least his modern heir. ruling, and we would be wondering how many more
dictators in Europe might join their club. History has
MISUNDERESTIMATING PUTIN
shown that just because something is inconceivable
Today, Putin is no more a man of mystery than he was
does not mean it won’t happen. But that is an important
when he took power two decades ago. What’s most
reason we got Putin wrong, and why, all too often, we
remarkable, knowing what we know now, is that so
still do. Putin is only nine years away from hitting
many thought he was. There are many reasons for the
Stalin’s modern record for Kremlin longevity, which
mistake. Outsiders have always judged Russia on their
appears to be more than achievable. But the West’s long
own terms, and Americans are particularly myopic when
history of misreading Russia suggests that this outcome
it comes to understanding other countries. Putin’s rise
is no more preordained than Putin’s improbable path to
from nowhere received more attention than where he
the Russian presidency was in the first place. We may
intended to take the country. Many failed to take Putin
have misunderestimated him before, but that doesn’t
either seriously or literally until it was too late, or
mean we might not misoverestimate him now. The
decided that what he was doing did not matter all that
warning signs are all there: the shrinking economy, the
much in a country that U.S. President Barack Obama
shrill nationalism as a distraction from internal decay,
characterized as a “regional power.” Often, Western
an inward-looking elite feuding over the division of
policymakers simply believed his lies. I will never forget
spoils while taking its monopoly on power for granted.
one encounter with a senior Bush administration official
Will this be Putin’s undoing? Who knows? But the ghost
in the months just before Putin decided to stay in power
of Brezhnev is alive and well in Putin’s Kremlin.
past his constitutionally limited two terms and
(Foreign Affairs, August 12, 2019)
engineered his temporary shift to the Russian
premiership. That would not happen, I was told. Why?
Because Putin had looked the official in the eye and said
26
Trump’s Assault on the Global Trading System by Chad P. Bown & Douglas A.
Irwin Donald Trump has been true to his word. After capped imports to protect the automotive and steel
excoriating free trade while campaigning for the U.S. industries during what was then the worst U.S.
presidency, he has made economic nationalism a recession since the Great Depression. Trump, however,
centerpiece of his agenda in office. His administration has enjoyed a period of strong economic growth, low
has pulled out of some trade deals, including the unemployment, and a virtual absence of protectionist
Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), and renegotiated pressure from industry or labor. And yet his
others, including the North American Free Trade administration has imposed more tariffs than most of
Agreement (NAFTA) and the U.S.-Korea Free Trade its predecessors. Take steel. Although there is nothing
Agreement. Many of Trump’s actions, such as the tariffs unusual about steel (along with aluminum) receiving
he has imposed on steel and aluminum, amount to overt government protection—the industry maintains a
protectionism and have hurt the U.S. economy. Others permanent presence in Washington and has been an
have had less obvious, but no less damaging, effects. By on-again, off-again beneficiary of trade restrictions
flouting international trade rules, the administration since the Johnson administration—the scope of the
has diminished the country’s standing in the world and protection provided and the manner in which the
led other governments to consider using the same tools Trump administration gave it last year were unusual. In
to limit trade arbitrarily. It has taken deliberate steps to order to avoid administrative review by independent
weaken the World Trade Organization (WTO)—some of agencies such as the nonpartisan, quasi-judicial U.S.
which will permanently damage the multilateral trading International Trade Commission, the White House
system. And in its boldest move, it is trying to use trade dusted off Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of
policy to decouple the U.S. and Chinese economies. A 1962. This Cold War statute gives the president the
future U.S. administration that wants to chart a more authority to impose restrictions on imports if the
traditional course on trade will be able to undo some of Commerce Department finds that they threaten to harm
the damage and start repairing the United States’ a domestic industry the government deems vital to
tattered reputation as a reliable trading partner. In some national security. The Trump administration’s national
respects, however, there will be no going back. The security case was weak. More than 70 percent of the
Trump administration’s attacks on the WTO and the steel consumed in the United States was produced
expansive legal rationalizations it has given for many of domestically, the imported share was stable, and there
its protectionist actions threaten to pull apart the was no threat of a surge. Most imports came from
unified global trading system. And on China, it has Canada, Germany, Japan, Mexico, and other allies, with
become clear that the administration is bent on severing, only a small fraction coming from China and Russia,
not fixing, the relationship. The separation of the thanks to antidumping duties already in place on those
world’s two largest economies would trigger a global countries. The number of jobs in the U.S. steel industry
realignment. Other countries would be forced to choose had been shrinking, but this was due more to advances
between rival trade blocs. Even if Trump loses reelection in technology than falling production or imports. In the
in 2020, global trade will never be the same. The first 1980s, for example, it took ten man-hours to produce a
two years of the Trump administration featured pitched ton of steel; today, it takes just over one man-hour.
battles between the so-called globalists (represented by Even the Defense Department was skeptical about the
Gary Cohn, then the director of the National Economic national security motivation. Prior administrations
Council) and the nationalists (represented by the Trump refrained from invoking the national security rationale
advisers Steve Bannon and Peter Navarro). The for fear that it could become an unchecked protectionist
president was instinctively a nationalist, but the loophole and that other countries would abuse it. In a
globalists hoped to contain his impulses and encourage sign that those fears may come true, the Trump
his attention-seeking need to strike flashy deals. They administration recently stood alongside Russia to argue
managed to slow the rollout of some new tariffs and that merely invoking national security is enough to
prevent Trump from precipitously withdrawing from defeat any WTO challenge to a trade barrier. This runs
trade agreements. But by mid-2018, the leading counter to 75 years of practice, as well as to what U.S.
globalists had left the administration, and the negotiators argued when they created the global trading
nationalists—the president among them—were in system in the 1940s. The Trump administration
command. Trump has a highly distorted view of dismissed all those concerns. The president and leading
international trade and international negotiations. officials desperately wanted to help the steel and
Viewing trade as a zero-sum, win-lose game, he stresses aluminum industries. (It did not hurt that Wilbur Ross,
one-time deals over ongoing relationships, enjoys the the commerce secretary, and Robert Lighthizer, the U.S.
leverage created by tariffs, and relies on brinkmanship, trade representative, both used to work for the steel
escalation, and public threats over diplomacy. The industry.) The administration also believed that its
president has made clear that he likes tariffs (“trade willingness to impose economic self-harm in the form of
wars are good, and easy to win”) and that he wants more higher steel and aluminum prices for domestic
of them (“I am a Tariff Man”). Even if Trump loses manufacturers would send a strong signal to other
reelection in 2020, global trade will never be the same. countries about its commitment to economic
Although the thrust of U.S. policy over the past 70 years nationalism. Trump also went so far as to impose tariffs
has been to pursue agreements to open up trade and on steel and aluminum imports from Canada,
reduce barriers, every president has for political something that even the domestic industry and labor
purposes used protectionist measures to help certain unions opposed. Over the last 30 years, the U.S. steel
industries. President Ronald Reagan, for example, and aluminum industries had transformed to become
27
North American industries, with raw steel and markets to U.S. farmers, and incorporates a host of new
aluminum flowing freely back and forth between provisions from the TPP. The renegotiation was in some
Canadian and U.S. plants. The same union represents ways an unnecessary exercise. NAFTA was a sound
workers on both sides of the border. In addition to agreement—no one in the administration could identify
lacking an economic ration-ale, targeting Canada what made it such a terrible deal—and many of its
alienated a key ally and seemed to make no political shortcomings had been fixed in the TPP, from which
sense, either. Trump withdrew the United States in 2017. But the
The administration also miscalculated the foreign contrast between the hostile rhetoric Trump heaped on
blowback against the tariffs. “I don’t believe there’s any NAFTA and the soft reality of the USMCA illuminates
country in the world that will retaliate for the simple the president’s approach to trade. Trump just doesn’t
reason that we are the biggest and most lucrative market like certain outcomes, including trade deficits and the
in the world,” Navarro, the president’s hawkish trade loss of certain industries. But instead of addressing their
adviser, told Fox News in 2018, apparently unaware that underlying causes, which have little to do with specific
other countries have trade hawks, too. Canada, China, trade agreements, he opts for managed trade,
Mexico, the European Union, and others all hit back substituting government intervention for market forces,
hard, largely by slapping tariffs on U.S. agricultural or new rules—a requirement that a greater proportion of
exports. In effect, the administration jeopardized the a vehicle be made in the United States for it to enter
welfare of 3.2 million American farmers to help 140,000 Mexico duty free, for example—that try to force his
U.S. steelworkers, a remarkable move given Trump’s preferred outcome. The goal is not to free up trade
electoral reliance on Midwestern farm states. Foreign further but to constrain trade according to Trump’s
governments fear that the United States is willing to whims. The USMCA is currently stalled in Congress,
abandon established trade norms. If the aim was to fire partly because the administration did not cultivate
a shot across the bow of U.S. trading partners, the tariffs congressional support for the renegotiation in the first
worked. Foreign governments were suddenly on alert place. But if the USMCA ultimately dies, neither Canada
that the United States was willing to abandon the nor Mexico will miss it. Both felt the need to sign the
established norms of trade policy. The White House has deal simply to get past the uncertainty created by
insisted that “economic security is national security.” Trump’s threats to withdraw from NAFTA, as well as to
Yet defining security so broadly opens the door to forestall the chance that he would impose auto tariffs.
unrestricted protectionism. And so when, in mid-2018, Both Japan and the EU also begrudgingly signed up for
the Trump administration made yet another national trade talks with the administration, in large part to
security case for tariffs, this time on delay Trump’s auto tariffs for as long as possible. Of the
automobiles—imports of which dwarf those of steel and two, Japan is more likely to agree to a deal—after all, it
aluminum combined by a factor of seven—the fear negotiated a trade agreement with the Obama
abroad reached a new level. Although the administration as part of the TPP. The Europeans are
administration recently announced that it was delaying less likely to do so, not only due to conflicts over
any new auto tariffs, the threat remains. The agriculture but also because of Trump’s unpopularity
consequences of imposing such a large tax on a major across Europe. But the Europeans hope that by agreeing
household item, in the sure knowledge that there would to talk, they can put off Trump’s auto tariffs and
be swift and heavy foreign retaliation, may be staying perhaps run out the clock on the administration.
the administration’s hand. The president’s enthusiasm
YOU’RE GONNA MISS ME WHEN I’M GONE
for tariff threats has even spilled over to issues beyond
Acts of protectionism are acts of self-harm. But the
trade. In May, Trump suddenly demanded that Mexico
Trump administration is also doing broader, and more
stop the flow of immigrants into the United States or
permanent damage to the rules-based trading system.
risk facing new, across-the-board tariffs of 25 percent.
That system emerged from the ashes of the trade wars
As long as Trump is in office, no country—even one that
of the 1930s, when protectionism and economic
has just negotiated a trade agreement with the United
depression fueled the rise of fascism and foreign
States—can be confident that it won’t be a target.
governments made deals that cut U.S. commercial
POINTLESS RENEGOTIATIONS interests out of the world’s leading markets. In 1947, the
On the 2016 campaign trail, Trump complained that United States responded by leading the negotiations to
NAFTA was “the worst trade deal ever,” a theme he has create the WTO’s predecessor, the General Agreement
continued in office. His advisers talked him out of on Tariffs and Trade, which limited arbitrary
simply withdrawing from the agreement, but Trump government interference in trade and provided rules to
insisted on renegotiating it and proceeded to make the manage trade conflicts. Under this system, trade
renegotiation process needlessly contentious. The barriers have gradually fallen, and growing trade has
administration made odd demands of Canada and contributed to global economic prosperity. The United
Mexico, including that the deal should result in balanced States once led by example. No longer. Trump has
trade and include a sunset clause that could terminate threatened to leave the WTO, something his previous
the agreement after five years, thus eliminating the actions suggest is more than idle talk. He says the
benefits of reduced uncertainty. The three countries agreement is rigged against the United States. The
finally reached a new agreement last September. administration denounces the WTO when the
Unimaginatively called the United States–Mexico organization finds U.S. practices in violation of trade
–Canada Agreement (USMCA), it is hardly a major rules but largely ignores the equally many cases that it
rewrite of NAFTA. It preserves NAFTA’s requirement of wins. Although the WTO’s dispute-settlement system
dutyfree access, would slightly open up Canadian dairy needs reform, it has worked well to defuse trade conflict
28
since it was established over two decades ago. Trump’s States press for the creation of a stronger, more effective
attacks on the WTO go beyond rhetoric. The dispute-settlement system in the 1990s, resulting in the
administration has blocked appointments to the WTO’s WTO. For Washington to tear down the trading system
Appellate Body, which issues judgments on trade it created would be a tragedy.
disputes; by December, if nothing changes, there will be
CONSCIOUS DECOUPLING
too few judges to adjudicate any new cases. When that
Nowhere has the Trump administration left a greater
happens, a dispute-settlement system that countries big
mark on U.S. trade policy than with China. In early
and small, rich and poor have relied on to prevent trade
2018, it released a lengthy report documenting a litany
skirmishes from turning into trade wars will disappear.
of concerns with Chinese trade practices. China had
This is more than a withdrawal of U.S. leadership. It is
been forcing U.S. companies to form joint ventures with
the destruction of a system that has worked to keep the
local firms to access its 1.4 billion consumers. These
trade peace. That is particularly unwelcome because so
arranged marriages then allowed China to acquire U.S.
much of global trade has nothing to do with the United
technology. Sometimes companies would hand it over to
States. The system resolves conflicts between Colombia
grease the palms of regulators, sometimes they would
and Panama, Taiwan and Indonesia, Australia and the
license it at below commercially viable rates, and
EU. Most disputes are settled without retaliation or
sometimes Chinese firms or spies would steal it.
escalation. The WTO has created a body of law that
Combined with some of the economic concerns
ensures more predictability in international commerce.
underlying the U.S. steel and aluminum tariffs—China’s
The system it manages works to the benefit of the
industrial subsidies, state-owned enterprises,
United States while freeing the country from having to
overcapacity, and failure to more fully transform into a
police global commerce single-handedly. The
market economy—the list of U.S. grievances created a
dispute-settlement system is not perfect. But rather than
recipe for confrontation. The result was tariffs, and
make constructive proposals for how to improve it,
countertariffs, on $360 billion worth of trade between
something Canada and others are now doing, the United
the two countries, an unprecedented figure. Many
States has disengaged. The Trump administration may
observers assumed that the Trump administration
end up destroying the old system without having drafted
simply wanted to get a better deal from China. But what
a blueprint for its successor. Trump’s goal is nothing
constituted a better deal was always vague. If the
less than a complete transformation of the Chinese
primary concern was the bilateral trade deficit, China
economy. What will come next? In the worst-case
could be pressured to go on a massive spending spree,
scenario, the new world trading system will be
buying up U.S. soybeans and energy products. If it was
dominated by discriminatory trade blocs that raise the
intellectual property theft, China might be persuaded to
costs of commerce, make trade negotiations harder, and
change a few laws and commit to international norms.
encourage retaliation. Size and economic power, not
It has become clear, however, that the administration
principles or rules, will determine the outcome of trade
does not want a permanent deal, or at least any deal
disputes. Such a system will hurt smaller, weaker
with an explicit path forward that the Chinese
countries and could push them to align with more
government might accept. Even if Trump and Chinese
powerful ones for self-preservation. It was precisely that
President Xi Jinping come to some superficial
trend in the 1930s that forced the United States to create
agreement, it is unlikely to be more than a temporary
the postwar trading system. And the lack of adherence
truce in what is now a permanent trade war.
to trade rules beginning in the 1970s made the United
The administration’s goal seems to be nothing less than administration had been serious about getting a deal
the immediate and complete transformation of the from China, it would have maximized its leverage by
Chinese economy or bust—with bust the most likely bringing along Japan and the EU, both of which have
outcome. To satisfy the United States, China would have similar economic concerns. Indeed, Japan and the EU
to end forced technology transfers, stop stealing have made considerable efforts to work with the
intellectual property, curtail subsidies to state-owned administration when it comes to China. They have
enterprises, abandon industrial policies designed to gain mostly been rebuffed. There were hints from the
technological dominance, stop harassing foreign firms beginning that the administration was never searching
operating in China, and begin to open markets that the for a deal that would truly end the trade war. In 2017,
government deliberately closed to give control to Navarro outlined the administration’s view that trade
domestic firms. In other words, the United States wants with China threatened U.S. national security. He also let
China to turn its state-dominated economic system into slip that he wanted to rip up the supply chains that
a marketbased one overnight. Such a change would bound the United States and China together. At the time,
perhaps be in China’s best interest, but economic regime some dismissed him as a rogue eccentric. Now, the
change is quite an ask for one country to make of United States is on the cusp of slapping tariffs on all
another. The Communist Party leadership keeps its lock imports from China—the first step toward Navarro’s
on power by maintaining control over all facets of the goal. Geopolitics has trumped economics. This is not
Chinese economy. Losing that control would jeopardize protectionism in the sense of trying to help a domestic
its grip on political power. No one seriously expects industry in its struggle against imports. The goal is
China’s leaders to cede control of the economy simply much broader and more significant: the economic
because of U.S. threats. The Trump administration may decoupling of the United States and China. That would
not even expect them to; it may have been asking all mark a historic fragmentation of the world economy. It
along for something that it knew China could not deliver. would represent, in the words of former Treasury
If so, the objective was never a comprehensive deal; it Secretary Henry Paulson, the falling of an “economic
was the tariffs themselves. For one thing, if the iron curtain” between the world’s two largest economies.
29
Such a separation would have foreign policy and THE DAMAGE DONE
national security implications well beyond the economic If Trump becomes a one-term president, the next
consequences. In some respects, the rupture is already administration will have an opportunity to reverse many
happening. Students and scientists from China are no of its predecessor’s trade policies—eliminating the steel
longer as welcome in the United States as they once and aluminum tariffs, repairing relationships with the
were. China’s already meager investments in the U.S. United States’ NAFTA partners, joining the CPTPP, and
economy are now under heightened scrutiny from improving the WTO. That would not only help restore
national security agencies. The administration is U.S. credibility on the world stage but also enable other
tightening up export controls, curtailing how and with countries to lift their retaliatory duties on U.S. exports,
whom Americans can share their inventions, especially helping suffering farmers. If Trump wins reelection and
in cutting-edge areas such as artificial intelligence, continues down the path of economic nationalism,
advanced computing, and additive manufacturing. That however, the prospect of continued, and perhaps
will not stop China from gaining better technology, intensified, trade conflict is likely to destroy the world
however; German, Japanese, and South Korean firms trading system. That would do incalculable damage to
will simply fill the void. Going it alone will put the U.S. the world economy. Although many of Trump’s policies
economy at even more of a disadvantage. Most can be reversed, the tariffs on China are a game changer.
traditional supporters of free trade are not so naive as to Any future administration would have a difficult time
believe that the United States should tolerate China’s removing them without sizable concessions from the
bad behavior as long as cheap goods continue to flow Chinese leadership and some way of alleviating the
into the United States. China, they agree, breaks the heightened national security fears that now dominate
rules. But the Trump administration’s clumsy unilateral the bilateral relationship. A future Democratic
approach is not the right answer. A better response administration may be even more disinclined to change
would be to identify specific instances in which China course. Many Democrats opposed the TPP and broadly
has violated international agreements and then join support the president’s anti-China stance. In May,
with trading partners and allies to file cases with the Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, Democrat of
WTO. (This is not as hopeless a tactic as it might sound: New York, tweeted his support for Trump on China,
China has complied with findings from the WTO urging him to “Hang tough” and not to cave in to a bad
surprisingly often.) Where China has not explicitly deal. More than a decade ago, Schumer and his Senate
violated agreements, Washington could still sanction colleagues supported slapping even higher tariffs on
unfair practices, preferably together with other Chinese goods than the ones Trump has imposed, on
countries so as to exert the maximum pressure possible, the grounds that China was keeping its currency
but unilaterally if that is the only feasible option. The artificially low to boost exports. Concerns over human
final plank of a sensible trade policy would be to join the rights will also push Democrats to confront China.
Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Although China’s herding of over a million Muslim
Trans-Pacific Partnership, the revised trade deal struck Uighurs in western China into concentration camps did
by the remaining members of the TPP after the U.S. not factor into the Trump administration’s trade
withdrawal. Joining the CPTPP would establish a large negotiations, it could loom large in those of a future
zone of trade rules favorable to the United States and administration. The system of world trade that the
unfavorable to China. That would help push China to United States helped establish after World W ar II is
resume its progress toward economic reform. Historians often described as multilateral. But it was not a global
will look back on Trump’s precipitous decision to quit system; it originally consisted of a small number of
the TPP as a major blunder. If the Trump Western, market-oriented economies and Japan and
administration really does want to separate the U.S. and excluded the Soviet Union, its eastern European
Chinese economies, the United States will have to pay satellites, and other communist countries. That division
an economic price. Trump denies that his strategy has was about more than politics. Market and nonmarket
costs. China, he says, is paying the tariffs. “I am very economies are in many ways incompatible. In a market
happy with over $100 Billion a year in Tariffs filling U.S. economy, a firm losing money has to adjust or go
coffers,” he tweeted in May. This is nonsense: research bankrupt. Under state capitalism, stateowned firms get
shows that firms pass on the cost of the tariffs to subsidies to maintain production and save jobs, forcing
American consumers. And U.S. exporters—mainly nonstate-owned firms—at home or abroad—to make the
farmers facing the loss of markets due to China’s painful adjustment instead. The Trump administration,
retaliation—are paying the price, as well. So, too, are together with China, as it retreats from pro-market
American taxpayers, now on the hook for tens of billions reforms, may be moving the world back to the historic
of dollars needed to bail out the reeling agricultural norm of political and economic blocs. The fall of the
sector. Whether Trump appreciates these costs isn’t Berlin Wall and the collapse of communism opened up
clear, but it’s evident that economic considerations eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union to global
aren’t driving policy. The president’s willingness to look markets. The reforms of Deng Xiaoping did the same for
past stock market slumps and continue to push China China. But only in the unipolar moment, which began in
shows that he is willing to pay an economic 2001, when China joined the WTO, were open markets
price—whatever he says in public. For someone whose truly global. Now, the period of global capitalism may be
reelection depends on maintaining a strong economy, coming to an end. What many thought was the new
that is a bold gamble. normal may turn out o have been a brief aberration.
(Foreign Affairs, August 13, 2019)
30
The Sources of Chinese Conduct by Odd Arne Westad
Are Washington and Beijing Fighting a New Cold War?
In February 1946, as the Cold War was coming into to the West’s. In a 2017 speech, Xi claimed that Beijing
being, George Kennan, the chargé d’affaires at the U.S. is “blazing a new trail for other developing countries to
embassy in Moscow, sent the State Department a achieve modernization” and “offers a new option for
5,000-word cable in which he tried to explain Soviet other countries and nations who want to speed up their
behavior and outline a response to it. A year later, the development while preserving their independence.”
text of his famous “Long Telegram” was expanded into a According to the CCP, Western talk about democracy is
Foreign Affairs article, “The Sources of Soviet Conduct.” simply a pretext for robbing poorer countries of their
Writing under the byline “X,” Kennan argued that the sovereignty and economic potential. Just as China has
Soviets’ Marxist-Leninist ideology was for real and that needed dictatorship to achieve extreme economic
this worldview, plus a deep sense of insecurity, was what growth, the thinking goes, other countries may need it,
drove Soviet expansionism. But this didn’t mean that too. Although such convictions have been slow to find
outright confrontation was inevitable, he pointed out, acolytes abroad, many Chinese have bought into the
since “the Kremlin has no compunction about retreating party’s version of truth, believing with Xi that thanks to
in the face of superior force.” What the United States the party’s leadership, “the Chinese nation, with an
had to do to ensure its own long-term security, then, entirely new posture, now stands tall and firm in the
was contain the Soviet threat. If it did, then Soviet East.” China’s extreme centralization of power could
power would ultimately crumble. Containment, in other have extreme consequences. Such views are the product
words, was both necessary and sufficient. Kennan’s of both the unprecedented improvement in living
message became the canonical text for those who tried standards in China and an increase in Chinese
to understand the conflict between the United States nationalism. The CCP issues relentless propaganda
and the Soviet Union. Always controversial and often about the greatness and righteousness of China, and the
revised (not least by the author himself), the Chinese people, understandably proud of what they
containment strategy that Kennan laid out would define have achieved, embrace it enthusiastically. The party
U.S. policy until the end of the Cold War. And as also claims that the outside world, especially the United
Kennan predicted, when the end did come, it came not States, is out to undo China’s progress, or at least
just because of the strength and steadfastness of the prevent its further rise—just as Soviet propaganda used
United States and its allies but even more because of to do. Making this nationalism even more sinister is the
weaknesses and contradictions in the Soviet system particular view of history endorsed by the Chinese
itself. Now, more than 70 years later, the United States leadership, which sees the history of China from the
and its allies again face a communist rival that views the mid-nineteenth century to the Communists’ coming to
United States as an adversary and is seeking regional power in 1949 as an endless series of humiliations at the
dominance and global influence. For many, including in hands of foreign powers. While there is some truth to
Washington and Beijing, the analogy has become this version of events, the CCP also makes the
irresistible: there is a U.S.-Chinese cold war, and frightening claim that the party itself is the only thing
American policymakers need an updated version of standing between the Chinese and further exploitation.
Kennan’s containment. This past April, Kiron Skinner, Since it would be untenable for the party to argue that
the director of policy planning at the State Department the country needs dictatorship because the Chinese are
(the job Kennan held when “The Sources of Soviet singularly unsuited to governing themselves, it must
Conduct” was published), explicitly called for a new “X” claim that the centralization of power in the party’s
article, this time for China. But if such an inquiry starts hands is necessary for protecting against abuse by
where Kennan’s did—with an attempt to understand the foreigners. But such extreme centralization of power
other side’s basic drivers—the differences become as could have extreme consequences. As Kennan correctly
pronounced as the parallels. It is these differences, the observed about the Soviet Union, “if . . . anything were
contrast between the sources of Soviet conduct then and ever to occur to disrupt the unity and efficacy of the
the sources of Chinese conduct now, that stand to save Party as a political instrument, Soviet Russia might be
the world from another Cold War. changed overnight from one of the strongest to one of
the weakest and most pitiable of national societies.”
FROM WEALTH TO POWER
Another troubling aspect of nationalism in China today
There are two central facts about China today. The first
is that the country is a de facto empire that tries to
is that the country has just experienced a period of
behave as if it were a nation-state. More than 40 percent
economic growth the likes of which the world had never
of China’s territory— Inner Mongolia, Tibet,
before seen. The second is that it is ruled, increasingly
Xinjiang—was originally populated by people who do
dictatorially, by an unelected communist party that puts
not see themselves as Chinese. Although the Chinese
people in prison for their convictions and limits all
government grants special rights to these “minority
forms of free expression and association. Under Xi
nationalities,” their homelands have been subsumed
Jinping, there are abundant signs that the Chinese
into a new concept of a Chinese nation and have
Communist Party (CCP) wants to roll back even the
gradually been taken over by the 98 percent of the
limited freedoms that people took for themselves during
population who are ethnically Chinese (or Han, as the
the reform era of Deng Xiaoping. There are also
government prefers to call them). Those who resist end
indications that the party wants to bring private
up in prison camps, just as did those who argued for
enterprise to heel, by intervening more directly in how
real selfgovernment within the Soviet empire.
businesses are run. Behind these policies lies a growing
Externally, the Chinese government sustains the world’s
insistence that China’s model of development is superior
31
worst dystopia, next door in North Korea, and routinely The similarities between China today and the Soviet
menaces its neighbors, including the democratic Union of old may seem striking—starting, of course,
government in Taiwan, which Beijing views as a with communist rule. For almost 40 years, blinded by
breakaway province. Much of this is not to China’s China’s market-led economic progress, the West had
advantage politically or diplomatically. Its militarization gotten used to downplaying the fact that the country
of faraway islets in the South China Sea, its contest with was run by a communist dictatorship. In spite of
Japan over the Senkaku/ Diaoyu Islands, and its occasional reminders of Chinese leaders’ ruthlessness,
attempts at punishing South Korea over the acquisition such as the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre, the
of advanced missile defenses from the United States Western consensus held that China was liberalizing and
have all backfired: East Asia is much warier of Chinese becoming more pluralistic. Today, such predictions look
aims today than it was a decade ago. (The percentage of foolish: the CCP is strengthening its rule and intends to
South Koreans, for example, who viewed China’s rise remain in power forever. “The great new project of Party
favorably fell from 66 percent in 2002 to 34 percent in building . . . is just getting into full swing,” Xi
2017, according to the Pew Research Center.) Despite announced in 2017. He added, “We must work harder to
this dip in China’s popularity, people across the region uphold the authority and centralized, unified leadership
overwhelmingly believe that China will be the of the Central Committee. . . . The Party remains always
predominant regional power in the future and that they the backbone of the nation.” Another similarity is that
had better get ready. China is a de facto empire that tries just as the Soviet Union sought predominance in
to behave as if it were a nation-state. This assumption is Europe, China is seeking it in East Asia, a region that is
based primarily on China’s spectacular economic growth. as important to the United States today as Europe was
Today, China’s economic power relative to the United at the beginning of the Cold War. The methods China is
States’ exceeds what the Soviet Union’s relative power using are similar—political and military extortion,
was by a factor of two or three. Although that growth divide-andrule tactics—and its capabilities are in fact
has now slowed, those who believe that China will soon greater. Unless the United States acts to countervail it,
go the way of Japan and fall into economic stagnation China is likely to become the undisputed master of East
are almost certainly wrong. Even if foreign tariffs on Asia, from Japan to Indonesia, by the late 2020s. Like
Chinese goods stayed high, China has enough of an Soviet leaders, Chinese ones view the United States as
untapped domestic market to fuel the country’s the enemy. They are careful and courteous in public,
economic rise for years to come. And the rest of Asia, and often declare their adherence to international
which is a much larger and more economically dynamic norms, but in the party’s internal communications, the
region than Western Europe was at the beginning of the line is always that the United States is planning to
Cold War, fears China enough to refrain from walling it undermine China’s rise through external aggression and
off with tariffs. It is in military and strategic terms thatinternal subversion. “So long as we persist in CCP
the competition between the United States and China is leadership and socialism with Chinese characteristics,”
hardest to gauge. The United States today has went one 2013 communiqué, “the position of Western
tremendous military advantages over China: more than anti-China forces to pressure for urgent reform won’t
20 times as many nuclear warheads, a far superior air change, and they’ll continue to point the spearhead of
force, and defense budgets that run at least three times Westernizing, splitting, and ‘Color Revolutions’ at
as high as China’s. It also has allies (Japan and South China.” Such anti-Americanism bears a striking
Korea) and prospective allies (India and Vietnam) in resemblance to the type Stalin promoted in the late
China’s neighborhood that boast substantial military 1940s, including open appeals to nationalism. In 1949,
capabilities of their own. China has no equivalent in the the Soviet-led Cominform proclaimed that the West had
Western Hemisphere. And yet within the last decade, “as its main aim the forcible establishment of
the balance of power in East Asia has shifted perceptibly Anglo-American world domination, the enslavement of
in China’s favor. Today, the country has enough foreign countries and peoples, the destruction of
ground-based ballistic missiles, aircraft, and ships to democracy and the unleashing of a new war.” The
plausibly contend that it has achieved military Americans, the CCP leadership tells its followers, hate
superiority in its immediate backyard. The Chinese us because we are Chinese. They are out to rule
missile force presents such a challenge to U.S. air bases the world, and only the Communist Party stands in
and aircraft carriers in the Pacific that Washington can their way.
no longer claim supremacy in the region. The problem
NOW AND THEN
will only get worse, as China’s naval capabilities are set
But China is not the Soviet Union. For one thing, Soviet
to grow massively within the next few years, and its
ideology was inherently opposed to any long-term
military technologies—especially its lasers, drones,
coexistence with the United States. From Lenin onward,
cyberoperations, and capabilities in outer space—are
Soviet leaders saw the world in zero-sum terms:
fast catching up to those of the United States. Even
bourgeois democracy and capitalism had to lose for
though the United States currently enjoys far greater
communism to win. There could be alliances of
military superiority over China than it did over the
convenience and even periods of détente, but in the end,
Soviet Union, Beijing has the potential to catch up much
their form of communism would have to be victorious
more quickly and comprehensively than Moscow ever
everywhere for the Soviet Union to be safe. The CCP
could. Overall, China is more of a match for the United
does not share such beliefs. It is nationalist rather than
States than the Soviet Union was when Kennan wrote
internationalist in outlook. The party sees Washington
down his thoughts.
as an obstacle to its goals of preserving its own rule and
PLUS ÇA CHANGE gaining regional dominance, but it does not believe that
32
the United States or its system of government has to be each other up, the more room for maneuver other
defeated in order to achieve these aims. Moreover, powers will have. The result may be a world of regional
Chinese society is more similar to American society than hegemons, and sooner rather than later. The U.S.
Soviet society ever was. In the Soviet Union, citizens domestic situation also looks very different from the
generally accepted and conformed to socialist economic way it did at the beginning of the Cold War. There were
policies. Chinese, by contrast, appear to be interested divisions among voters and conflicts between parts of
above all in getting ahead in their competitive, the government back then, but there was nothing
market-oriented society. For the vast majority of them, compared to the polarization and gridlock that
communism is simply a name for the ruling party rather characterize American politics today. Now, the United
than an ideal to seek. True, some sympathize with Xi’s States seems to have lost its way at home and abroad.
efforts to centralize power, believing that China needs Under the Trump administration, the country’s overall
strong leadership after the individualism of the 1990s standing in the world has never been lower, and even
and early years of this century went too far. But nobody, close allies no longer view Washington as a reliable
including Xi himself, wants to bring back the bad old partner. Since well before the presidency of Donald
days before the reform and opening began. For all his Trump, U.S. foreign policy elites have been lamenting
Maoist rhetoric, Xi, both in thought and practice, is the decline of any consensus on foreign affairs, but they
much further removed from Mao Zedong than even the have proved incapable of restoring it. Now, the rest of
reform-minded Mikhail Gorbachev was from Lenin. the world questions the United States’ potential for
What’s more, the Chinese have enjoyed a remarkably leadership on issues great and small, issues on which
peaceful few decades. In 1947, the Russians had just American guidance would have been considered
emerged from 30-plus years of continuous war and indispensable in the past. The U.S. economy is also
revolution. In Kennan’s words, they were “physically intertwined with the Chinese economy in ways that
and spiritually tired.” The Chinese have had the would have been unimaginable with the Soviet economy.
opposite experience: some two-thirds of the population As Kennan knew well, economically speaking, the
have known nothing but peace and progress. The Soviets did not need to be contained; they contained
country’s last foreign military intervention, in Vietnam, themselves by refusing to join the world economy.
ended 30 years ago, and its last major conflict, the China is very different, since about one-third of its GDP
Korean War, ended almost 70 years ago. On the one growth can be traced to exports, and the United States is
hand, the past few decades of success have its largest trading partner. Attempting to disentangle
demonstrated the value of peace, making people wary of the United States’ economy from China’s through
risking it all in war. On the other hand, the lack of political means, such as travel restrictions, technology
near-term memories of war has led to a lot of loose talk bans, and trade barriers, will not work, unless a de facto
about war among people who have never experienced it. state of war makes economic interaction impossible. In
These days, it is increasingly common to hear Chinese, the short run, tariffs could create a more level playing
especially the young, espousing the idea that their field, but in the long run, they may end up advantaging
country may have to fight a war in order to avoid getting China by making it more self-reliant, to say nothing of
hemmed in by the United States. Xi and his group are the damage they would inflict on American prestige.
not natural risk-takers. But in a crisis, the Chinese are And so the rivalry with China will have to be managed
more likely to resemble the Germans in 1914 than the within the context of continued economic
Russians after World War II—excitable, rather than interdependence. Finally, China’s leaders have some
exhausted. Chinese society is more similar to American international cards to play that the Soviets never held.
society than Soviet society ever was. The global balance Compared with the class-based politics Moscow was
of power has also changed since Kennan’s time. Today, peddling during the Cold War, China’s appeals for
the world is becoming not more bipolar but more global unity on such issues as climate change, trade, and
multipolar. This process is gradual, but there is little inequality could find far greater traction abroad. That
doubt that the trend is real. Unlike in the Cold War, would be ironic, given China’s pollution, protectionism,
greater conflict between the two biggest powers today and economic disparities. But because the United States
will not lead to bipolarity; rather, it will make it easier has failed to take the lead on any of these issues, China’s
for others to catch up, since there are no ideological communist government may be able to convince
compulsions, and economic advantage counts for so foreigners that authoritarian governments handle such
much more. The more the United States and China beat problems better than democracies do.
FOCUSING THE AMERICAN MIND planning. That is especially true given that fast-moving
The sources of Chinese conduct, along with the current economic and technological changes will make a
global role of the United States, point to a rivalry of a traditional containment policy impossible—information
different kind than the one Kennan saw coming in 1946 travels so much more easily than before, especially to a
and 1947. The risk of immediate war is lower, and the country like China, which does not intend to cut itself
odds of limited cooperation are higher. But the danger off from the world The risk of immediate war is lower,
that nationalism will fuel ever-widening circles of and the odds of limited cooperation are higher. Even
conflict is probably greater, and China’s determination though the pattern of conflict between the United States
to hack away at the United States’ position in Asia is and China will look very different from the Cold War,
more tenacious than anything Stalin ever attempted in that doesn’t mean that Kennan’s advice is irrelevant.
Europe. If the United States wants to compete, it must For one thing, just as he envisioned continued U.S.
prepare for a long campaign for influence that will test involvement in Europe, the United States today needs to
its own ability for strategic prioritizing and long-term preserve and build deep relationships with Asian
33
countries that are fearful of China’s rising aggression. To international system. Washington should try to bring
counter the Soviet threat, Washington rolled out the Moscow into a more cooperative relationship with the
Marshall Plan (which was partly Kennan’s brainchild) in West by opening up more opportunities for partnership
1948 and created NATO (of which Kennan was at least and helping settle the conflict in eastern Ukraine. If
partly skeptical) the following year. Today, likewise, U.S. Washington refuses to do that, then the strategic
alliances in Asia must have not only a security nightmare that haunted U.S. officials during the Cold
dimension but also an economic dimension. Indeed, the War yet never fully materialized may actually come true:
economic aspects are probably even more important a real Sino-Russian alliance. Today, the combination of
today than they were 70 years ago, given that China is Russia’s resources and China’s population could power
primarily an economic power. The removal of U.S. a far greater challenge to the West than what was
support for the Trans-Pacific Partnership was therefore attempted 70 years ago. As Kennan noted in 1954, the
only real danger to Americans would come through “the
much as if the Americans, having just invented NATO, association of the dominant portion of the physical
suddenly decided to withdraw from it. The Trump resources of Europe and Asia with a political power
administration’s decision may have made domestic hostile to [the United States].” One of Kennan’s greatest
political sense, but in terms of foreign policy, it was a insights, however, had nothing to do with foreign affairs;
disaster, since it allowed China to claim that the United it had to do with American politics. He warned in his
States was an unreliable partner in Asia. Kennan also “X” article that “exhibitions of indecision, disunity and
recognized that the United States would be competing internal disintegration” within the United States were
with the Soviet Union for decades to come, and so U.S. the biggest danger the country faced. Kennan also
statecraft would have to rely on negotiations and warned against complacency about funding for common
compromises as much as on military preparedness and purposes. Like 70 years ago, to compete today, the
intelligence operations. Kennan’s fellow policymakers United States needs to spend more money, which
learned this lesson only gradually, but there is little necessarily means higher contributions from wealthy
doubt that the process of developing a mutual Americans and corporations, in order to provide
understanding contributed to the peaceful end of the top-quality skills training, world-class infrastructure,
Cold War. U.S. and Soviet officials had enough contact and cutting-edge research and development. Competing
to make the best of a bad situation and stave off war with China cannot be done on the cheap. Ultimately,
long enough for the Soviets to change their approach to Kennan argued, American power depended on the
the United States and to international affairs in general. United States’ ability to “create among the peoples of
China is even more likely to change its attitude than the the world generally the impression of a country which
Soviet Union was. The current struggle is not a clash of knows what it wants, which is coping successfully with
civilizations—or, even worse, of races, as Skinner the problems of its internal life and with the
suggested in April, when she pointed out that China is a responsibilities of a world power, and which has a
“competitor that is not Caucasian.” Rather, it is a spiritual vitality capable of holding its own among the
political conflict between great powers. A substantial major ideological currents of the time.” Although one
minority of Chinese resent their current leaders’ power might phrase it differently, the challenge is exactly the
play. They want a freer and more equitable China, at same today. Will the competition with China focus, to
peace with its neighbors and with the United States. The use one of Kennan’s favored phrases, “the American
more isolated China becomes, the less of a voice such mind” to the point that the United States abandons
people will have, as their views drown in an ocean of domestic discord in favor of consensus? If some
nationalist fury. As Kennan stressed in the Soviet case, unifying factor does not intervene, the decline in the
“demands on Russian policy should be put forward in United States’ ability to act purposefully will, sooner
such a manner as to leave the way open for a compliance than most people imagine, mean not just a multipolar
not too detrimental to Russian prestige.” The United world but an unruly world—one in which fear, hatred,
States also needs to help create a more benign and ambition hold everyone hostage to the basest
environment beyond Asia. At a time when China is instincts of the human imagination.
continuing its rise, it makes no sense to leave Russia as a (Foreign Affairs, August 12, 2019)
dissatisfied scavenger on the periphery of the
War Is Not Over by Tanisha M. Fazal & Paul Poast

What the Optimists Get Wrong About Conflict?
The political turmoil of recent years has largely backers in academia and politics. At the start of this
disabused us of the notion that the world has reached decade, the Harvard psychologist Steven Pinker devoted
some sort of utopian “end of history.” And yet it can still a voluminous book, The Better Angels of Our Nature, to
seem that ours is an unprecedented era of peace and the decrease of war and violence in modern times.
progress. On the whole, humans today are living safer Statistic after statistic pointed to the same conclusion:
and more prosperous lives than their ancestors did. looked at from a high enough vantage point, violence is
They suffer less cruelty and arbitrary violence. Above all, in decline after centuries of carnage, reshaping every
they seem far less likely to go to war. The incidence of aspect of our lives “from the waging of wars to the
war has been decreasing steadily, a growing consensus spanking of children.” Pinker is not alone. “Our
holds, with war between great powers becoming all but international order,” U.S. President Barack Obama told
unthinkable and all types of war becoming more and the United Nations in 2016, “has been so successful that
more rare. This optimistic narrative has influential we take it as a given that great powers no longer fight
34
world wars, that the end of the Cold War lifted the care for them. Consider one of the most widely used
shadow of nuclear Armageddon, that the battlefields of databases of armed conflict: that of the Correlates of
Europe have been replaced by peaceful union.” At the War project. Since its founding in the 1960s, COW has
time of this writing, even the Syrian civil war is winding required that to be considered a war, a conflict must
down. There have been talks to end the nearly two generate a minimum of 1,000 battle related fatalities
decades of war in Afghanistan. A landmark prisoner among all the organized armed actors involved. Over
swap between Russia and Ukraine has revived hopes of the two centuries of war that COW covers, however,
a peace agreement between the two. The better angels of medical advances have drastically changed who lives
our nature seem to be winning. If this sounds too good and who dies in battle. Paintings of wounded military
to be true, it probably is. Such optimism is built on personnel being carried away on stretchers have given
shaky foundations. The idea that humanity is past the way to photographs of medevac helicopters that can
era of war is based on flawed measures of war and peace; transfer the wounded to a medical facility in under one
if anything, the right indicators point to the worrying hour—the “golden hour,” when the chances of survival
opposite conclusion. And the anarchic nature of are the highest. Once the wounded are on the operating
international politics means that the possibility of table, antibiotics, antiseptics, blood typing, and the
another major conflagration is ever present. ability to transfuse patients all make surgeries far more
likely to be successful today. Personal protective
BODY COUNTS The notion that war is in terminal equipment has evolved, too. In the early nineteenth
decline is based, at its core, on two insights. First, far century, soldiers wore dress uniforms that were often
fewer people die in battle nowadays than in the past, cumbersome without affording any protection against
both in absolute terms and as a percentage of the world gunshots or artillery. World War I saw the first proper
population. Experts at the Peace Research Institute Oslo helmets; flak jackets became common in the Vietnam
pointed this out in 2005, but it was Pinker who War. Today, soldiers wear helmets that act as shields
introduced the point to a wider audience in his 2011 and radio sets in one. Over the course of the wars in
book. Reviewing centuries of statistics on war fatalities, Afghanistan and Iraq alone, medical improvements
he argued that not only is war between states on the have decreased the number of deaths from improvised
decline; so are civil wars, genocides, and terrorism. He explosive devices and small?arms fire. As a result of
attributes this fall to the rise of democracy, trade, and a these changes, many contemporary wars listed in
general belief that war has become illegitimate. Then COW’s database appear less intense. Some might not
there is the fact that there has not been a world war make it past COW’s fatality threshold and would
since 1945. “The world is now in the endgame of a therefore be excluded. Better sanitation has left its mark,
five-century-long trajectory toward permanent peace too, especially improvements in cleanliness, food
and prosperity,” the political scientist Michael distribution, and water purification. During the
Mousseau wrote in an article in International Security American Civil War, physicians often failed to wash
earlier this year. The political scientist Joshua Goldstein their hands and instruments between patients. Today’s
and the legal scholars Oona Hathaway and Scott Shapiro doctors know about germs and proper hygiene. A
have also argued as much, tying the decline of interstate six-week campaign during the Spanish-American War
war and conquest to the expansion of market economies, of 1898 led to just 293 casualties, fatal and nonfatal,
the advent of peacekeeping, and international from fighting but a staggering 3,681 from various
agreements outlawing wars of aggression. Taken illnesses. This was no outlier. In the Russo-Turkish War
together, these two points—fewer and fewer battle of 1877–78, nearly 80 percent of the deaths were caused
deaths and no more continent-spanning wars—form a by disease. Because counting and categorizing casualties
picture of a world increasingly at peace. Unfortunately, in a war is notoriously difficult, these statistics should
both rest on faulty statistics and distort our be taken with a grain of salt, but they illustrate a
understanding of what counts as war. War has not broader point: as sanitation has improved, so has the
become any less prevalent; it has only become less lethal. survivability of war. The health of soldiers also skews
To begin with, relying on body counts to determine if battle deaths, since ill soldiers are more likely to die in
armed conflict is decreasing is highly problematic. battle than healthier soldiers. And military units
Dramatic improvements in military medicine have fighting at their full complement will have higher
lowered the risk of dying in battle by leaps and bounds, survival rates than those decimated by disease.
even in high-intensity fighting. For centuries, the ratio Moreover, some of the advances that have made
of those wounded to those killed in battle held steady at modern war less deadly, although no less violent, are
three to one; the wounded-to-killed ratio for the U.S. more reversible than they seem. Many depend on the
military today is closer to ten to one. Many other ability to quickly fly the wounded to a hospital. For the
militaries have seen similar increases, meaning that U.S. military, doing so was possible in the asymmetric
today’s soldiers are far more likely to wind up injured conflicts against insurgents in Afghanistan and Iraq,
than dead. That historical trend undermines the validity where the United States had almost total control of the
of most existing counts of war and, by extension, belies skies. In a great?power war, however, airpower would
the argument that war has become a rare occurrence. be distributed much more equally, limiting both sides’
Although reliable statistics on the war wounded for all ability to evacuate their wounded via air. Even a conflict
countries at war are hard to come by, our best between the United States and North Korea would
projections cut by half the decline in war casualties that severely test U.S. medevac capabilities, shifting more
Pinker has posited. What’s more, to focus only on the casualties from the “nonfatal” to the “fatal” column. And
dead means ignoring war’s massive costs both for the a great power war could involve chemical, biological,
wounded themselves and for the societies that have to radiological, or nuclear weapons, which have been used
35
so rarely that there are no good medical models for wipe out billions of lives, and that terrifying fact, many
treating their victims. Skeptics may point out that most argue, has kept great-power clashes from boiling over
wars since World War II have been civil wars, whose into all-out wars. But the idea that military technology
parties might not actually have had access to has so altered the dynamics of conflict as to make war
sophisticated medical facilities and procedures— inconceivable is not new. In the 1899 book Is War Now
meaning that the decline in casualties is more real than Impossible, the Polish financier and military theorist
artifice. Although this is true for many rebel groups, civilJan Gotlib Bloch posited that “the improved deadliness
wars also typically involve state militaries, which do of weapons” meant that “before long you will see they
invest in modern military medicine. And the will never fight at all.” And in 1938—just a year before
proliferation of aid and development organizations since Hitler invaded Poland, and several years before nuclear
1945 has made many of these advances available, at technology was considered feasible—the American
least to some extent, to civilian populations and peace advocate Lola Maverick Lloyd warned that “the
insurgents. A foundational principle of humanitarian new miracles of science and technology enable us at last
organizations such as the International Committee of to bring our world some measure of unity; if our
the Red Cross is impartiality, meaning that they do not generation does not use them for construction, they will
discriminate between civilians and combatants in giving be misused to destroy it and all its slowly-won
aid. In addition, rebel groups often have external civilization of the past in a new and terrible warfare.” It
supporters who provide them with casualty-reducing may be that nuclear weapons truly have more deterrent
equipment. (The United Kingdom, for example, shipped potential than past military innovations—and yet these
body armor to the insurgent Free Syrian Army at the weapons have introduced new ways that states could
start of the Syrian civil war.) As a result, even databases stumble into a cataclysmic conflict. The United States,
that include civil wars and use a much lower fatality for example, keeps its missiles on a “launch on warning”
threshold than COW, such as the widely referenced status, meaning that it would launch its missiles on
database of the Uppsala Conflict Data Program, may receiving word that an enemy nuclear attack was in
end up giving the erroneous impression that civil wars progress. That approach is certainly safer than a policy
have become less prevalent when in fact they have of preemption (whereby the mere belief that an
become less lethal. Collecting exact data on the injured adversary’s strike was imminent would be enough to
in civil wars is admittedly difficult. As a recent report bytrigger a U.S. strike). But by keeping nuclear weapons
the nongovernmental organization Action on Armed ready to use at a moment’s notice, the current policy
Violence argues, fewer resources for journalists and still creates the possibility of an accidental launch,
increased attacks on aid workers mean that those most perhaps driven by human error or a technical
likely to report on the wounded are less able to do so malfunction.
today than in the past, leading to a likely undercounting.
SMALL GREAT WARS All in all, recent history does
Dubious statistics thus come out of conflicts such as the
not point to a decline of war at large. But what about
Syrian civil war, with media reports suggesting a
war between great powers? The historian John Lewis
wounded to-killed ratio of nearly one to one since 2011.
Gaddis famously referred to the post-1945 era as “the
But common sense suggests that the real number of
long peace.” Deterred by nuclear weapons and locked
injuries is far higher. If one ignores these trends and
into a global network of international institutions, great
takes the existing databases at face value, the picture is
powers have avoided a repeat of the carnage of the two
still far from rosy. The tracker managed by the Uppsala
world wars. When the European Union was awarded the
Conflict Data Program shows that even according to
Nobel Peace Prize in 2012, it was in part for this
existing databases that may undercount conflict, the
remarkable achievement. We tend to view World Wars I
number of active armed conflicts has been ticking up in
and II as emblematic of war. They are not. There has,
recent years, and in 2016, it reached its highest point
indeed, not been a World War III. But that does not
since the end of World War II. And many of today’s
necessarily mean the age of great-power peace is here.
conflicts are lasting longer than past conflicts did.
In truth, the last century’s world wars are a poor
Recent spikes of violence in the Democratic Republic of
yardstick, as they bore little resemblance to most of the
the Congo, Mexico, and Yemen show few signs of
great-power wars that preceded them. The 1859
abating. To be sure, the decline of battle deaths, when
Franco-Austrian War lasted less than three months; the
considered on its own, is a major victory for human
1866 Austro-Prussian War was a little over one month
welfare. But that achievement is reversible. As the
long. Each produced fewer than 50,000 battle deaths.
political scientist Bear Braumoeller pointed out in his
Even the 1870–71 Franco-Prussian War, which paved
book Only the Dead, the wars of recent decades may
the way for a unified German empire, lasted just six
have remained relatively small in size, but there is little
months and resulted in about 200,000 battle deaths.
reason to expect that trend to continue indefinitely. One
The world wars were orders of magnitude different from
need only recall that in the years preceding World War I,
those conflicts. World War I was over four years long
Europe was presumed to be in a “long peace.” Neither
and produced some nine million battle deaths. World
brief flashes of hostility between European powers, such
War II lasted six years and led to over 16 million battle
as the standoff between French and German forces in
deaths. In other words, World Wars I and II have
Morocco in 1911, nor the Balkan Wars of 1912 and 1913
severely skewed our sense of what war is. Scholars and
could dispel this notion. Yet these small conflicts turned
policymakers tend to view these conflicts as emblematic
out to be harbingers of a much more devastating
of war. They are not. Most wars are relatively short,
conflagration. Today, the long shadow of nuclear
lasting less than six months. They tend to result in 50 or
weapons ostensibly keeps that scenario from repeating.
fewer battle deaths per day—a number that pales in
Humanity has stockpiles of nuclear warheads that could
36
comparison to the figures produced during World War I mercenaries or recruits from conquered territories,
(over 5,000 dead per day) and World War II (over 7,000 made up the overall majority of the troops that set off to
per day). In fact, if one excludes these two outliers, the invade Russia. (Many of them soon tired of marching in
rates of battle deaths from the mid-nineteenth century the summer heat and abandoned the coalition,
until 1914 are consistent with those in the decades since shrinking Napoleon’s forces by more than half before he
1945. There have, in fact, been a number of great-power was yet one-quarter of the way through the campaign.)
wars since 1945. But they are rarely recognized as such Still, his reliance on foreign troops allowed Napoleon to
because they did not look like the two world wars. They place the burden of the fighting on non-French, and he
include the Korean War, in which the United States reportedly told the Austrian statesman Klemens von
faced off against forces from China and the Soviet Union, Metternich that “the French cannot complain of me; to
and the Vietnam War, which also pitted the United spare them, I have sacrificed the Germans and the
States against Chinese forces. In both cases, major Poles.” Put simply, most violent conflicts, even among
powers fought each other directly. The list of recent great powers, do not look like World War I or II. This is
great-power conflicts grows much longer if one includes not at all to diminish the importance of those two wars.
instances of proxy warfare. From U.S. support for the Understanding how they happened can help avoid
mujahideen fighting Soviet forces in Afghanistan during future wars or at least limit their scale. But to determine
the Cold War to the foreign rivalries playing out in Syria if great-power war is in decline requires a clear
and Ukraine, major powers regularly fight one another conceptual understanding of what such a war is: one
using the military labor of others. Outsourcing that recognizes that World War I and II were
manpower like this is no recent invention and is in fact a unparalleled in scale and scope but not the last
relatively normal feature of great-power war. Consider instances of great-power conflict—far from it. The
Napoleon’s march to Russia in 1812. The invasion is behavior of states has not necessarily improved. In truth,
famous for the attrition suffered by the Grande Armée the apparent decline in the deadliness of war masks a
as it pushed east. Far less known is that despite its great deal of belligerent behavior.
immense size of over 400,000 men, the force was
largely not French. Foreign fighters, be they
arms, it may well be that today’s states are neither more
DON'T CELEBRATE TOO EARLY civilized nor inherently peaceful but simply exercising
The idea that war is increasingly a thing of the past is effective deterrence. That raises the same specter as the
not just mistaken; it also enables a harmful brand of existence of nuclear weapons: deterrence may hold, but
triumphalism. War’s ostensible decline does not mean there is a real possibility that it will fail.
that peace is breaking out. Certainly, the citizens of El
FEAR IS GOOD
Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, and Venezuela would
The greatest danger, however, lies not in a misplaced
object to the notion that their countries are peaceful,
sense of progress but in complacency—what U.S.
even though none is technically at war. As the
Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, in a
sociologist Johan Galtung has argued, true peace, or
different context, called “throwing away your umbrella
“positive peace,” must also contain elements of active
in a rainstorm because you are not getting wet.” At a
engagement and cooperation, and although
time of U.S.-Russian proxy wars in Syria and Ukraine,
globalization since the end of the Cold War has linked
rising tensions between the United States and Iran, and
disparate communities together, there have also been
an increasingly assertive China, underestimating the
setbacks. Following the collapse of the Berlin Wall, there
risk of future war could lead to fatal mistakes. New
were fewer than ten border walls in the world. Today,
technologies, such as unmanned drones and
there are over 70, from the fortified U.S.-Mexican
cyberweapons, heighten this danger, as there is no
border to the fences separating Hungary and Serbia and
consensus around how states should respond to their
those between Botswana and Zimbabwe. It strains
use. Above all, overconfidence about the decline of war
credulity that the better angels of our nature are
may lead states to underestimate how dangerously and
winning when humanity is armed to the teeth. Even
quickly any clashes can escalate, with potentially
when ongoing wars do come to an end, caution is
disastrous consequences. It would not be the first time:
warranted. Consider civil wars, many of which now end
the European powers that started World War I all set
in peace treaties. Some, such as the 2016 Colombian
out to wage limited preventive wars, only to be locked
peace deal, are elaborate and ambitious documents that
into a regional conflagration. In fact, as the historian A.
run over 300 pages long and go far beyond standard
J. P. Taylor observed, “every war between Great
disarmament processes to address land reform, drug
Powers . . . started as a preventive war, not a war of
policy, and women’s rights. And yet civil wars that end
conquest.” A false sense of security could lead today’s
with peace agreements tend to sink back into armed
leaders to repeat those mistakes. That danger is all the
conflict sooner than those that end without them. Often,
more present in an era of populist leaders who disregard
what looks to the international community as an orderly
expert advice from diplomats, intelligence communities,
end to a conflict is just a means for the warring parties
and scholars in favor of sound bites. The gutting of the
to retrench and regroup before fighting breaks out anew.
U.S. State Department under President Donald Trump
Likewise, it strains credulity that the better angels of our
and Trump’s dismissive attitude toward the U.S.
nature are winning when humanity is armed to the teeth.
intelligence community are but two examples of a larger
Global military expenditures are higher today than
global trend. The long-term consequences of such
during the late Cold War era, even when adjusted for
behavior are likely to be profound. Repeated enough,
inflation. Given that countries haven’t laid down their
the claim that war is in decline could become a
37
self-defeating prophecy, as political leaders engage in counterproductive wall building in ways that increase
bombastic rhetoric, military spectacles, and the risk of war. (Foreign Affairs, October 15th, 2019)
Warnings From Versailles by Margaret MacMillan

The Lessons of 1919, a Hundred Years On
We often recall World War I and the two decades that the British prime minister, the prospect was particularly
followed as a grim chapter of history, the prelude to an daunting. Unlike in 1815, when negotiators met in
even costlier and more destructive war from 1939 to Vienna to wind up the Napoleonic Wars, in 1919 Europe
1945. We remember terrible losses—the nine million or was not tired of war and revolution. Nor had aggressor
more dead in battle, the civilians who died of nations been utterly defeated and occupied, as they
preventable disease or starvation, the ghastly influenza would be in 1945. Rather, leaders in 1919 confronted a
epidemic that, in the dying days of the war and the world in turmoil. Fighting continued throughout much
shaky first moments of peace, may have carried off as of eastern Europe, the Caucasus, and the Middle East.
many as 50 million around the world. We think of a Russia’s Bolshevik Revolution of 1917 had apparently
Europe that once led the world in wealth, innovation, set off a series of unstoppable revolutionary waves that
and political power, only to emerge from the war threatened to overwhelm even the victors’ societies. The
diminished, its Russian and Austro-Hungarian empires war had damaged or destroyed old political and social
in tatters, Bolshevism and ethnic nationalism structures, particularly in Central Europe, leaving
threatening more upheaval and misery. The calamity of formerly stable and prosperous peoples adrift,
the 1930s was not foreordained at Versailles. Yet when desperate for someone or something to restore their
the Allies gathered at the Paris Peace Conference in status and a form of order. Ethnic nationalists seized the
Versailles 100 years ago, from January to June 1919, the opportunity to build new countries, but these states
time was also one of hope. The Allied leaders promised were often hostile to one another and oppressive to their
their own peoples a better world in recompense for all own minorities. Inevitably, too, old and new rivalries
they had suffered, and U.S. President Woodrow Wilson came to the surface as leaders in Paris maneuvered to
made of those promises a crusade for humankind: a War promote the interests of their nations. Wilson and
to End All Wars, a World Safe for Democracy. Wilson’s company also had to deal with a phenomenon that their
League of Nations was meant to create an international forerunners at the Congress of Vienna had never had to
community of democratic nations. By providing consider: public opinion. The publics in Allied countries
collective security for one another, they would not only took an intense interest in what was happening in Paris,
end aggression but build a fairer and more prosperous but what they wanted was contradictory: a better world
world. These ideas drew support around the of the Wilsonian vision, on the one hand, and
globe—from Europe, where Wilson was greeted as a retribution on the other. Many Europeans felt that
savior, to the West’s colonies, and even in struggling someone must be made to pay for the war. In France
nations such as China. But the world was to discover and Belgium, which Germany had invaded on the
that making peace endure was a matter not just of hopes flimsiest of pretexts, the countryside lay in ruins, with
and ideas but of will, determination, and persistence. towns, mines, railways, and factories destroyed. Across
Leaders need to negotiate as well as to inspire; to be the border, Germany was unscathed, because little of
capable of seeing past short-term political gains; and to the war had been fought there. The British had lent vast
balance the interests of their nations against those of the sums to their allies (their Russian debts were beyond
international community. For want of such leadership, hope of recovery), had borrowed heavily from the
among other things, the promise of 1918 soon turned Americans, and wanted recompense. John Maynard
into the disillusionment, division, and aggression of the Keynes, not yet the world-renowned economist he was
1930s. This outcome was not foreordained at Versailles. to become, suggested that the Americans write off the
Although some of the decisions made upon ending the money the British owed them so as to reduce the need
war in 1919 certainly fueled populist demagoguery and to extract reparations from the defeated and then
inspired dreams of revenge, the calamity of World War concentrate on getting Europe’s economy going again.
II owed as much to the failure of the democracies’ The Americans, Wilson included, rejected the proposal
leaders in the interwar decades to deal with with self-righteous horror. And so the Allied statesmen
rulebreaking dictators such as Mussolini, Hitler, and the drew up a reparations bill that they knew was more than
Japanese militarists. A century later, similar the defeated could ever pay. Austria and Hungary were
forces—ethnic nationalism, eroding international norms impoverished remnants of a once vast Habsburg empire,
and cooperation, and vindictive chauvinism—and Bulgaria was broke, and the Ottoman Empire was on
authoritarian leaders willing to use them are again the verge of disintegrating. That left only Germany
appearing. The past is an imperfect teacher, its capable of meeting the reparations bill.
messages often obscure or ambiguous, but it offers both
A RUDE AWAKENING
guidance and warning.
The circumstances of Germany’s defeat had left its
THE PRICE OF PEACE citizens in no mood to pay. That feeling would grow
“Making peace is harder than waging war,” French stronger over the decade to follow. And its outcome
Prime Minister Georges Clemenceau reflected in 1919 as contains a warning for our era: the feelings and
the victorious powers drew up peace terms, finalized the expectations of both the winners and the losers,
shape of the new League of Nations, and tried to rebuild however unrealistic, matter and require careful
Europe and the global order. For Clemenceau and his management. Toward the end of the war, the German
colleagues, among them Wilson and David Lloyd George, High Command under Generals Erich Ludendorff and
38
Paul von Hindenburg had effectively established a the Rhineland on the western edge of the country,
military dictatorship that kept all news from the front Germans did not experience firsthand the shame of
under wraps. The civilian government in Berlin knew as military occupation. As a result, many Germans, living
little as the public about the string of defeats the in what Max Weber called the dreamland of the winter
country’s military suffered in the late spring and of 1918–19, expected the Allies’ peace terms to be
summer of 1918. When the High Command suddenly mild—milder, certainly, than those Germany had
demanded that the government immediately sue for an imposed on revolutionary Russia with the Treaty of
armistice, the announcement came like a thunderbolt. Brest-Litovsk in March 1918. The country might even
The German chancellor appealed to Wilson in a series of expand if Austria, newly formed out of the
open letters, and the U.S. president, somewhat to the German-speaking territories of the vanished
annoyance of the European Allies, took on the role of Austro-Hungarian Empire, decided to join its fate to
arbiter between the warring sides. In doing so, Wilson Germany’s. The actual Treaty of Versailles, published in
made two mistakes. First, he negotiated with Germany’s the spring of 1919, came as a shock. Public opinion from
civilian government rather than the High Command, right to left was dismayed to learn that Germany would
allowing the generals to avoid responsibility for the war have to disarm, lose territory, and pay reparations for
and its outcome. As time went by, the High Command war damage. Resentment focused in particular on
and its right-wing supporters put out the false story that Article 231 of the treaty, in which Germany accepted
Germany had never lost on the battlefield: the German responsibility for starting the war and which a young
military could have fought on, perhaps even to victory, if American lawyer, John Foster Dulles, had written to
the cowardly civilians had not let it down. Out of this provide a legal basis for claiming reparations. Germans
grew the poisonous myth that Germany had been loathed the “war guilt” clause, as it came to be known,
stabbed in the back by an assortment of traitors, and there was little will to pay reparations. Weimar
including liberals, socialists, and Jews. Second, Wilson’s Germany—much like Russia after the collapse of the
public statements that he would not support punitive Soviet Union— nursed a powerful and lasting sense of
indemnities or a peace of vengeance reinforced German national humiliation. For many years, the German
hopes that the United States would ensure that Foreign Office and its right-wing supporters did their
Germany was treated lightly. The U.S. president’s best to further undermine the legitimacy of the Treaty of
support for the revolution that overthrew Germany’s old Versailles. With the help of selectively released
monarchy and paved the way for the parliamentary documents, they argued that Germany and its allies
democracy of the Weimar Republic compounded this were innocent of starting the war. Instead, Europe had
misplaced optimism. Weimar, its supporters argued, somehow stumbled into disaster, so that either everyone
represented a new and better Germany that should not or no one was responsible. The Allies could have done
pay for the sins of the old. Many Europeans felt that more to challenge German views about the origins of the
someone must be made to pay for the war, but the war and the unfairness of the treaty. Instead, at least in
circumstances of Germany’s defeat had left its citizens in the case of the English-speaking peoples, they
no mood to pay. The French and other Allies, however, eventually came rather to agree with the German
were less concerned with Germany’s domestic politics narrative, and this fed into the appeasement policies of
than with its ability to resume fighting. The armistice the 1930s. Peace would take a very different form in
signed in the famous railway carriage at Compiègne on 1945. With memories of the previous two decades fresh
November 11, 1918, reads like a surrender, not a in their minds, the Allies forced the Axis powers into
cessation of hostilities. Germany would have to evacuate unconditional surrender. Germany and Japan were to
all occupied territory and hand over its heavy be utterly defeated and occupied. Selected leaders
armaments, as well as the entirety of its navy. Even so, would be tried for war crimes and their societies
the extent of the military defeat was not immediately reshaped into liberal democracies. Invasive and coercive
clear to the German public. Troops returning from the though it was, the post– World War II peace generated
front marched into Berlin in December 1918, and the far less resentment about unfair treatment than did the
new socialist chancellor hailed them with the words “No arrangements that ended World War I.
enemy has overcome you.” Apart from those living in
MISSED OPPORTUNITIES
The terms of Versailles were not the only obstacle to a commitment to the guarantee. France, left to itself,
lasting resolution of European conflicts in 1919. London attempted to form the new and quarreling states in
and Washington also undermined the chances for peace Central Europe into an anti-German alliance, but its
by quickly turning their backs on Germany and the rest attempts turned out to be as ill-fated as the Maginot
of the continent. Although it was never as isolationist as Line in the west. One wonders how history might have
some have claimed, the United States turned inward unfolded if London and Washington, instead of turning
soon after the Paris Peace Conference. Congress rejected away, had built a transatlantic alliance with a strong
the Treaty of Versailles and, by extension, the League of security commitment to France and pushed back against
Nations. It also failed to ratify the guarantee given to Adolf Hitler’s first aggressive moves while there was still
France that the United Kingdom and the United States time to stop him. London and Washington undermined
would come to its defense if Germany attacked. the chances for peace by quickly turning their backs on
Americans became all the more insular as the the continent. Again, the post-1945 world was different
calamitous Great Depression hit and their attention from the one that emerged in 1919. The United States,
focused on their domestic troubles. The United States’ now the world’s leading power, joined the United
withdrawal encouraged the British—already distracted Nations and the economic institutions set up at Bretton
by troubles brewing in the empire—to renege on their
39
Today’s world is not wholly comparable to the worlds
Woods. It also committed itself to the security and that emerged from the rubble of the two world wars. Yet
reconstruction of western Europe and Japan. Congress as the United States once again turns inward and tends
approved these initiatives in part because President only to its immediate interests, it risks ignoring or
Franklin Delano Roosevelt made building the postwar underestimating the rise of populist dictators and
order a bipartisan enterprise—unlike Wilson, who aggressive powers until the hour is dangerously late.
doomed the League of Nations by alienating the President Vladimir Putin of Russia has already violated
Republicans. Wilson’s failure had encouraged the international rules and norms, most notably in Crimea,
isolationist strain in U.S. foreign policy; Roosevelt, and others—such as President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of
followed by Harry S. Truman and Dwight D. Eisenhower, Turkey or Chinese President Xi Jinping—seem willing to
countered and contained that impulse. The specter of do the same. And as Washington and other democratic
communism also did its part by alarming even the powers abdicate their responsibility for the world,
isolationists. The establishment of the Soviet empire in smaller powers may abandon their hopes for a peaceful
eastern Europe, and Soviet rhetoric about the coming international order and instead submit to the bullies in
struggle against capitalism, persuaded many Americans their neighborhoods. A hundred years on, 1919 and the
that they faced a pressing danger that required years that followed still stand as a somber warning.
continued engagement with allies in Europe and Asia. (Foreign Affairs, January 8th, 2019)
What a military intervention in Venezuela would look like? by Frank O. Mora

The United States has a clear objective in Venezuela: a civilian government. That could take years, given the
regime change and the restoration of democracy and the country's size and military strength. Venezuela has a
rule of law. Yet sanctions, international diplomatic population of 33 million spread across a territory twice
isolation, and internal pressure have failed to deliver a the size of Iraq. Its military is 160,000 strong and
breakthrough. Minds are turning to military paramilitaries, colectivos (armed leftist groups that
intervention. U.S. President Donald Trump has said that support Maduro), and criminal gangs collectively have
“all options are on the table.” What if he means it? There more than 100,000 members. Even if a military
are two plausible ways the United States might use force intervention began well, U.S. forces would likely find
in Venezuela: a precision bombing campaign and a themselves bogged down in the messy work of keeping
full-scale invasion. Either course would have to be the peace and rebuilding institutions for years to come.
followed by efforts to stabilize the country and establish
carrier or from a partner nation, to help destroy
DEATH FROM ABOVE
infrastructure. Finally, U.S. forces would likely use
For precision strikes to work, they would need to
cyberweapons to manipulate, degrade, and destroy
destroy the Maduro regime’s military, security, and
Venezuela’s defenses. The United States would almost
economic infrastructure. The aim would be to eliminate
certainly get sucked in to a long, difficult campaign to
the regime’s ability to repress the Venezuelan people
stabilize Venezuela after the initial fighting was over. In
and to convince the military to abandon the government.
the best-case scenario, the Venezuelan military would
Precision strikes are often portrayed as a quick, cheap,
defect at the sight of the first Tomahawk missile,
safe, and effective alternative to a broader military
deciding to support a new government to avoid
intervention. But two U.S. precision strike operations—
escalation. The Venezuelan military, however, may not
in Libya, in 2011, and in Yugoslavia, in 1999—
have the professional wherewithal, after decades of
underscore their unpredictable nature and their limited
degradation by the Chavista regime, to maintain order
ability to shape political outcomes. In Libya, where the
as an interim government assumed power by disarming
strikes lasted for seven months, the intervention
rogue groups that would continue to support Maduro.
achieved its narrow objective—the collapse of Muammar
In the worst-case scenario, a precision strike operation
al-Qaddafi’s regime—but left the country in chaos. The
would last for months, killing possibly thousands of
civilians, destroying much of what remains of
three-month bombing campaign in Yugoslavia was
Venezuela’s economy, and wiping out the state security
more successful: it degraded the Yugoslav military’s
forces. The result would be anarchy. Militias and other
ability to repress the population and helped lead to the
armed criminal groups would roam the streets of major
establishment of a UN-monitored political framework,
cities unchecked, wreaking havoc. More than eight
although that was a more limited goal than regime
million Venezuelans would likely flee. The chaos would
change. A precision military intervention in Venezuela
likely lead the United States to send in ground troops in
would require operations in the air, at sea, and in
order either to finally dislodge the regime and its
cyberspace. The U.S. Navy would need to station an
security forces or to provide security once the
aircraft carrier off the coast of Venezuela to enforce a
dictatorship had collapsed. Such a scenario is not
no-fly zone and hit military targets and crucial
improbable. Indeed, the most likely outcome of a
infrastructure. The navy would also need to deploy a
campaign of air strikes is that the Venezuelan armed
group of battleships and, perhaps, submarines that
forces would disintegrate. The United States, perhaps
could launch a steady stream of Tomahawk missiles at
with international partners, would then have no option
military targets, such as air bases, air defense facilities,
but to send troops to neutralize Venezuela’s irregular
and communications and command and control centers.
armed groups and restore order while a new
The United States would need to deploy other assets,
government and security apparatus established
too, such as attack tactical aircraft (which have greater
themselves. How long such a peacekeeping occupation
precision) and drones, deployed either from an aircraft
40
would last is hard to say, but the difficulty of the projectlead the rebuilding of Venezuela’s security forces and
and the complexity of the country's geography suggest keep troops in the country for years. There’s no such
that troops would stay in Venezuela for a lot longer than thing as risk-free military action. But in this case, the
the few months for which they might initially be sent. social, economic, and security costs of intervening far
The United Nations Stabilization Mission in Haiti, for outweigh the benefits. Whether the United States
example, lasted 13 years in a much smaller country. launched limited air strikes or a full ground invasion, it
would almost certainly get sucked in to a long, difficult
GROUND INVASION
campaign to stabilize Venezuela after the initial fighting
Rather than launching precision strikes and getting
was over. Such an engagement would cost American
sucked into a ground war later, the United States might
lives and money and hurt the United States’ standing in
choose to go all-in from the beginning. That would
Latin America. An extended occupation would reignite
mean a major intervention, including both air strikes
anti-Americanism in the region, particularly if U.S.
and the deployment of at least 150,000 ground troops to
soldiers committed real or perceived abuses, and it
secure or destroy airfields, ports, oil fields, power
would damage U.S. relations with countries outside the
stations, command and control centers,
region, too. Finally, a war-weary American public is
communications infrastructure, and other important
unlikely to stand for yet another extended military
government facilities, including the president’s
campaign. (Foreign Affairs, March 19th, 2019)
residence, Miraflores Palace. The invading army would
face 160,000 regular Venezuelan troops and more than
100,000 paramilitaries. The most recent large-scale
U.S.-led military interventions, in Afghanistan in 2001
and in Iraq in 2003, both required U.S. troops to remain
after the initial invasion for nearly 20 years. By 2017,
the two interventions had involved more than two
million U.S. military personnel and cost more than $1.8
trillion. More than 7,000 U.S. service members have
died in Afghanistan and Iraq. The costs of an
intervention in Venezuela, which is free of the kind of
sectarian divides that plague Afghanistan and Iraq,
would likely not come near those numbers, but they
would likely be significant. The last Latin American
country the United States invaded was Panama, in 1989.
More than 27,000 U.S. military personnel and more
than 300 aircraft quickly overwhelmed a Panamanian
Defense Force of less than 20,000. Although the
invasion lasted only about 42 days, U.S. military
operations in Panama continued for another four and a
half years. An invasion of Venezuela would take far
more troops and last far longer. In the best-case
scenario, the Venezuelan military would fold quickly
and Maduro and his inner circle would flee without a
fight. The colectivos, civilian militias, and other
paramilitaries would stay out of the way. Cuban and
Russian security forces would abandon their posts, and
the Venezuelan people would welcome the foreign
forces with open arms. After the collapse of the regime,
the United States would withdraw most of its troops,
except a limited number who would stay to support the
Venezuelan security forces working to restore order. Yet
things would likely not go so easily. In the worst-case
outcome, U.S. forces would quickly defeat the
Venezuelan military but then find themselves bogged
down in guerrilla warfare with former members of the
Venezuelan military, paramilitary groups, Colombian
insurgents, colectivos, and some members of the civilian
militia—all of them aided by Cuba and Russia. Under
those conditions, the U.S. military would have to stay in
Venezuela for years until a new government was able to
maintain order. The most likely scenario lies somewhere
between the two extremes. After a U.S. invasion, the
Venezuelan military would likely surrender quickly, the
regime would collapse, and most Cuban and Russian
personnel would withdraw. But the U.S. presence would
push military defectors, paramilitary groups, and
militias into hiding. The United States would have to
41
“Throughout history, when societies face tough economic times, we have seen
democratic reforms deferred, decreased trust in government, persecution of
minority groups, and a general shrinking of the democratic space.”
–Samantha Power
Modern day Turkey emerged as independent state under the leadership of
Mustafa Kamal Ataturk. Mustafa was an army officer who founded an
independent Republic of Turkey from the ruins of the Ottoman Empire. In the
early 20th century when the European empires were scrambling for capturing
more and more territory outside Europe, all European powers had their eyes on
the lands of Ottoman Empire. For the purpose of sharing the lands a secret
treaty titled Sykes-Picot Agreement was signed between Britain, France and
Tsarist Russia. As part of the Central Powers, the alliance suffered defeat in the
World War I. Nevertheless, The Turkish War of Independence initiated by
Kamal Ataturk and his colleagues against occupying Allies, resulted in the
abolition of monarchy in 1922 and the establishment of the Republic of Turkey
in 1923, with Atatürk as its first president till his death in 1938. Falling to the
trap of modernity, he sought refuge in secularization and westernization as the
only model available for progress. In the process, he stifled opposition with an
authoritarian hand. Things only changed, politically, with emergence of Justice
and development party that was founded in 2001. But over the time, President of
Turkey Recep Tayyip Erdogan, also head of the Justice and Development Party,
too is keen on suppressing his political opponents. This shrink of democratic
space is a common phenomenon across the globe at the present.
42
The United States Should Fear a Faltering China by Michael Beckley
The defining geopolitical story of our time is the slow 2014 alone. China’s debt has quadrupled in absolute
death of U.S. hegemony in favor of a rising China. size over the last ten years and currently exceeds 300
Harbingers of Beijing’s ascent are everywhere. China’s percent of its GDP. No major country has ever racked up
overseas investments span the globe. The Chinese navy so much debt so fast in peacetime. Worse still, assets
patrols major sea lanes, while the country colonizes the that once propelled China’s economic ascent are fast
South China Sea in slow motion. And the government turning into liabilities. In the 1990s and early 2000s,
cracks down on dissent at home while administering a the country enjoyed expanding access to foreign
hefty dose of nationalist propaganda. Beijing’s markets and technology. China was nearly self-sufficient
newfound assertiveness looks at first glance like the in food, water, and energy resources, and it had the
mark of growing power and ambition. But in fact it is greatest demographic dividend in history, with eight
nothing of the sort. China’s actions reflect profound working-age adults for every citizen aged 65 or older.
unease among the country’s leaders, as they contend Now China is losing access to foreign markets and
with their country’s first sustained economic slowdown technology. Water has become scarce, and the country is
in a generation and can discern no end in sight. China’s importing more food and energy than any other nation,
economic conditions have steadily worsened since the having decimated its own natural endowments. Thanks
2008 financial crisis. The country’s growth rate has to the one-child policy, China is about to experience the
fallen by half and is likely to plunge further in the years worst aging crisis in history, because it will lose 200
ahead, as debt, foreign protectionism, resource million workers and young consumers and gain 300
depletion, and rapid aging take their toll. China’s million seniors in the course of three decades. Any
economic woes will make it a less competitive rival in country that has accumulated debt, lost productivity, or
the long term but a greater threat to the United States aged at anything close to China’s current clip has lost at
today. When rising powers have suffered such least one decade to near-zero economic growth. How
slowdowns in the past, they became more repressive at will China handle the coming slump?
home and more aggressive abroad. China seems to be
WE’VE SEEN THIS BEFORE
headed down just such a path.
When fast-growing great powers run out of economic
RED FLAGS steam, they typically do not mellow out. Rather, they
In March 2007, at the height of a years-long economic become prickly and aggressive. Rapid growth has fueled
boom, then Premier Wen Jiabao gave an their ambitions, raised their citizens’ expectations, and
uncharacteristically gloomy press conference. China’s unnerved their rivals. Suddenly, stagnation dashes
growth model, Wen warned, had become “unsteady, those ambitions and expectations and gives enemies a
unbalanced, uncoordinated, and unsustainable.” The chance to pounce. Fearful of unrest, leaders crack down
warning was prescient: in the years since, China’s on domestic dissent. They search feverishly for ways to
official gross domestic product (GDP) growth rate has restore steady growth and keep internal opposition and
dropped from 15 percent to six percent—the slowest rate foreign predation at bay. Expansion presents one such
in 30 years. The country’s economy is now experiencing opportunity—a chance to seek new sources of wealth,
its longest deceleration of the post-Mao era. A growth rally the nation around the ruling regime, and ward off
rate of six percent could still be considered spectacular. rival powers. The historical precedents are plentiful.
By way of contrast, consider that the U.S. economy has Over the past 150 years, nearly a dozen great powers
been stuck at a rate of around two percent. But many experienced rapid economic growth followed by long
economists believe that China’s true rate is roughly half slowdowns. None accepted the new normal quietly. U.S.
the official figure. Moreover, GDP growth does not growth plummeted in the late nineteenth century, and
necessarily translate into greater wealth. If a country Washington reacted by violently suppressing labor
spends billions of dollars on infrastructure projects, its strikes at home while pumping investment and exports
GDP will rise. But if those projects consist of bridges to into Latin America and East Asia, annexing territory
nowhere, the country’s stock of wealth will remain there and building a gigantic navy to protect its
unchanged or even decline. To accumulate wealth, a far?flung assets. Russia, too, had a late-
country needs to increase its productivity—a measure nineteenth-century slowdown. The tsar responded by
that has actually dropped in China over the last decade. consolidating his authority, building the Trans-Siberian
Practically all of China’s GDP growth has resulted from Railway, and occupying parts of Korea and Manchuria.
the government’s pumping capital into the economy. Japan and Germany suffered economic crises during the
Subtract government stimulus spending, some interwar years: both countries turned to
economists argue, and China’s economy may not be authoritarianism and went on rampages to seize
growing at all. Subtract stimulus spending and China’s resources and smash foreign rivals. France had a
economy may not be growing at all. The signs of postwar boom that fizzled in the 1970s: the French
unproductive growth are easy to spot. China has built government then tried to reconstitute its economic
more than 50 ghost cities—sprawling metropolises of sphere of influence in Africa, deploying 14,000 troops in
empty offices, apartments, malls, and airports. its former colonies and embarking on a dozen military
Nationwide, more than 20 percent of homes are vacant. interventions there over the next two decades. As
Excess capacity in major industries tops 30 percent: recently as 2009, world oil prices collapsed, which led a
factories sit idle and goods rot in warehouses. Total stagnating Russia to pressure its neighbors to join a
losses from all this waste are difficult to calculate, but regional trade bloc. A few years later, that campaign of
China’s government estimates that it blew at least $6 coercion spurred Ukraine’s Maidan revolution and
trillion on “ineffective investment” between 2009 and Russia’s annexation of Crimea. When fast-growing great
43
powers run out of economic steam, they become prickly foreign direct investment and quintupling overseas
and aggressive. The question, then, is not whether a lending in an ambitious attempt to secure markets and
struggling rising power will expand abroad but what resources for Chinese firms. Beijing also has gone out
form that expansion will take. The answer depends in militarily, launching more warships over the past
part on the structure of the global economy. How open decade than the whole British navy holds and flooded
are foreign markets? How safe are international trade major sea lanes in Asia with hundreds of government
routes? If circumstances allow it, a slowing great power vessels and aircraft. It has built military outposts across
might be able to rejuvenate its economy through the South China Sea and frequently resorts to sanctions,
peaceful trade and investment, as Japan tried to do after ship-ramming, and aerial intercepts in territorial
its postwar economic miracle came to an end in the disputes with its neighbors. If China’s growth slows
1970s. If that path is closed, however, then the country further in the coming years, as is likely, the Chinese
in question may have to push its way into foreign government will probably double down on the
markets or secure critical resources by force—as Japan repression and aggression of the past decade. When the
did in the 1930s. The global economy is more open country’s leaders cannot rely on rapid growth to bolster
today than in previous eras, but a global rise in their domestic legitimacy and international clout, they
protectionism and the trade war with the United States will be all the more eager to squelch dissent, burnish
increasingly threaten China’s access to foreign markets their nationalist credentials, and boost the economy by
and resources. China’s leaders fear, with good reason, any means necessary. Moreover, powerful interest
that the era of hyper globalization that enabled their groups—most notably, state?owned enterprises and the
country’s rise is over. The structure of a country’s home military and security services—have developed a vested
economy will further shape its response to a slowdown. interest in maintaining China’s current strategy, which
The Chinese government owns many of the country’s funnels money into their coffers. As a result, the
major firms, and those firms substantially influence the government would struggle to extricate itself from
state. For this reason, the government will go to great foreign entanglements even if it wanted to.
lengths to shield companies from foreign competition
WASHINGTON’S BALANCING ACT
and help them conquer overseas markets when profits
The danger to the United States and its allies is clear.
dry up at home. A state-led economy like China’s is
Rampant espionage, protectionism, a splintered
unlikely to liberalize during a slowdown. Doing so would
internet, naval clashes in the East and South China Seas,
require eliminating subsidies and protections for
and a war over Taiwan are only the more obvious risks
state-favored firms, reforms that risk instigating a surge
that a desperate and flailing China will pose. U.S.
in bankruptcies, unemployment, and popular
statecraft will need to contain these risks without
resentment. Liberalization also could disrupt the crony
causing China to lash out in the process. To that end,
capitalist networks that the regime depends on for
Washington will have to deter Chinese aggression,
survival. Instead, regimes like China’s usually resort to
assuage China’s insecurities, and insulate the United
mercantilist expansion, using money and muscle to
States from blowback should deterrence and
carve out exclusive economic zones abroad and divert
reassurance fail. The inherent tension among these
popular anger toward foreign enemies. The
objectives will make the task a very difficult one.
most aggressive expanders of all tend to be
Chinese power will gradually mellow. Now, however, is
authoritarian capitalist states, of which China is clearly a
a moment of maximum danger. Some initiatives could
prime example.
help strike the proper balance. Instead of deterring
TROUBLE AHEAD Chinese expansionism by sailing provocative but
China’s recent behavior is a textbook response to vulnerable naval armadas past China’s coastline, for
economic insecurity. Back in the 1990s and the early instance, Washington could deploy mobile antiship and
years of this century, when the country’s economy was surface-to-air missile launchers on allied shores. If the
booming, China loosened political controls and United States joined the Comprehensive and
announced to the world its “peaceful rise,” to be pursued Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership—
through economic integration and friendly diplomatic and invited China to join, too—Beijing would have the
relations. Compare the situation today: labor protests motive and means to reduce its trade-distorting
are on the rise, elites have been moving their money and practices without fighting a 1930s-style trade war. China
children out of the country en masse, and the might spurn the offer, but then the treaty would at least
government has outlawed the reporting of negative strengthen the commitment of its signatories to the free
economic news. President Xi Jinping has given multiple flow of goods, money, and data. In so doing, it would
internal speeches warning party members of the limit the spread of China’s mercantilist and digital
potential for a Soviet-style collapse. The government has authoritarian policies. The United States could
doubled internal security spending over the past decade, supplement this stance by investing more in scientific
creating the most advanced propaganda, censorship, research and investigations into specific Chinese
and surveillance systems in history. It has detained one companies and investors, so that it can maintain
million Uighurs in internment camps and concentrated technological superiority without banning Chinese
power in the hands of a dictator for life. State investment and immigration into the United States.
propaganda blames setbacks, such as the 2015 stock These moves would not eliminate the root causes of
market collapse and the 2019 Hong Kong protests, on U.S.-Chinese rivalry, but they would protect U.S.
Western meddling. These are not the actions of a interests while avoiding a slide into a cold or hot war.
confident superpower. China has projected its power Perhaps in a few decades, Chinese power will gradually
abroad throughout this turbulent period— tripling mellow. Now, however, is a moment of maximum
44
danger, because China is too weak to feel secure or
satisfied with its place in the world order but strong
enough to destroy it. As China’s economic miracle
comes to an end, and Xi’s much-touted Chinese Dream
slips away, the United States must contain China’s
outbursts with a careful blend of deterrence,
reassurance, and damage limitation. Compared to
gearing up for a whole-of-society throwdown against a
rising superpower, this mission may seem uninspiring.
But it would be smarter—and ultimately more effective.
(Foreign Affairs, October 28th, 2019)
45
ASEAN’S MID-LIFE CRISIS IN AN AGE OF GEOSTRATEGIC FLUX
The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) more visible than in how ASEAN has had to manage the
has come a long way since its founding in 1967. The South China Sea dispute, which involves several
organisation now encompasses almost all Southeast member states as littoral claimants. ASEAN
Asian countries and is regarded as one of the most communiques and joint statements on the matter have
successful regional organisations of its kind. Yet will become a largely predictable and timid affair, given how
ASEAN be able to navigate these challenging times of some member states effectively use what amounts to a
insecurity? If ASEAN were a country, it would be the veto to block the adoption of language and statements
world’s seventh largest and is projected to be take the that would lend greater urgency to the concerns posed
fourth spot by 2050. Its economy has grown almost by China in the dispute. The trade element of the
100-fold and now boasts a combined GDP of around US-China dynamic, largely coloured by the infamous
US$2.8 trillion. The establishment of the ASEAN trade dispute or trade war between the two major
Economic Community (AEC) in 2015 marked a major powers, also bring up another troubling concern for
milestone in its efforts on regional economic integration. ASEAN and its member states. Many members of
Its political and security achievements are no less ASEAN are at different levels of development and
impressive. In a region fraught with conflicts since the depend on trade, heavy investment or, in some cases,
end of World War II, ASEAN Member States have never, aid, from the two major powers and their allies. The
despite their various disputes, had any serious armed more developed economies of ASEAN are also closely
clash amongst themselves. Many of the existing regional connected to the global supply chains of both major
multilateral regional economic, strategic and security powers. While some sectors here might have benefitted
arrangements – Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation from the dispute, the longer and more protracted this
(APEC), ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF), East Asia trade dispute gets, the worse the risks for ASEAN
Summit (EAS) and ASEAN Defence Ministers’ Meeting Member States, especially if the tit-for-tat sanctions
(ADMM) Plus – were either initiated by ASEAN or see worsen. Despite the constant reassurances by both the
ASEAN as a key component. All in all, it plays a central United States and China that they do not desire to
role in wider regional stability. undermine ASEAN cohesiveness and neutrality, many
Another significant, but often underplayed achievement, observers and stakeholders in this region perceive just
is the establishment of the Socio-Cultural Community – the opposite. In fact, some further argue that given the
which aims to improve the quality of life of its peoples state of affairs between the two major powers, it is not
through cooperative activities that are people-oriented in their interests to allow ASEAN a relatively free reign
as well as environmentally friendly and geared towards to play a bridging role in the regional security and
the promotion of sustainable development. Given strategic architectures. On the internal front, despite the
ASEAN’s emphasis on the sovereignty of member states significant progress mentioned earlier, ASEAN
in terms of policymaking and the sensitivity on continues to face challenges in terms of unequal growth,
encroaching on one’s internal affairs, it is quite meaningful economic integration and the need for
remarkable that there are now groups at various levels – sustainable development. Many of these are
ministers, senior officials, technical committees and longstanding – especially developmental gaps and
non-governmental organisations – discussing and, at opportunities between different member states. Access
times, attempting to harmonise various policy matters to technology, education and even banking facilities
on education, sports, women and family development, vary significantly between the more developed member
poverty eradication and healthcare. However, while states and those in the bottom rungs. Despite the
much has been achieved, most observers and various milestone goals and achievements under the
stakeholders are in agreement that ASEAN is AEC, there are questions whether the less developed
undergoing tremendous challenges. These are both countries of ASEAN have really benefitted as much as
externally imposed and originate from within the their better off siblings. It is not uncommon to hear the
organisation and its member states. What makes them sentiment that the latter have largely ignored the former
all the more significant, but tough, is that they are when it comes to quality economic initiatives and this
taking place amidst a broader regional environment of has caused some resentment. Further compounding this
uncertainty – where disruptive issues run rampant and is the fact that ASEAN is home to young, literate and
longstanding established norms, including increasingly urbanised and aspirational populations.
multilateralism, are increasingly being ignored by states. Member states are confronted with demands to help
One critical external challenge with potentially severe their young populations meet the challenges of a
consequences is the impact of major power competition, modernised world. ASEAN governments will need to
in particular the dynamics between the United States work closely with the private sector and
and China, on the cherished yet rather ambiguous non-government organisations to adopt innovative
“centrality” of ASEAN. This dynamic, which is approaches and achieve sustainable solutions. Last, but
increasingly competitive and possibly adversarial, has not least, domestic developments within countries –
contributed to the wider geostrategic flux in the wider including insecurity in the Southern Philippines – and
region. While ASEAN has kept itself relatively natural disasters remain a challenge for the regional
disentangled from such rivalry, there are signs of this organisation and its member states. While there has
beginning to unravel. Both major powers do hold been a concentrated multilateral effort to address the
significant sway over different ASEAN Member States. latter, the former remains a hot-button for many
Indeed, both can and will either ignore ASEAN or work regional observers. Here, the issue of displacement in
to sway decisions when it suits them. Nowhere is this Myanmar, particularly of the ethnic Rohingya from the
46
Rakhine state is a longstanding and prickly issue for the to prescriptive measures has been the need for more
regional organisation. For member states like Malaysia, ASEAN leaders to step up to the mantle during these
in particular, it is an increasingly urgent matter as there times of uncertainty. Some observers, especially veteran
are real concerns about state-sanctioned genocide that ones, pine for the days when “strong” regional leaders
has been taking place, as well as the large numbers of like Suharto, Mahathir Mohamad, Ferdinand Marcos
displaced Rohingya that are present in, and headed to, and Lee Kuan Yew publically advocated for ASEAN and
Malaysia. Given such circumstances, the discussion on its relationships when dealing with major powers. They
how ASEAN and its member states can effectively bemoan the decreased sense of regionalism among
respond is a common one in conferences, presentations today’s leaders who seem more concerned with national
and articles these last few years. And at the rate things priorities, sometimes at the expense of ASEAN. Yet
are going, it might remain that way for the foreseeable perhaps it is this overreliance on “leaders”, what more of
future. One of the most recommended suggestions is for the strongman variety, which has contributed to
ASEAN to strengthen its Secretariat and various ASEAN’s current conundrums. Rather than leaders, the
mechanisms and agencies in terms of personnel, funds emphasis should perhaps be on leadership – which is
and powers. A more effective Secretariat is crucial more enduring than the former. The challenges ASEAN
towards strengthening ASEAN’s internal centrality and faces, and the organisation itself, have changed. The
dealing with some of the challenges mentioned above. type of leadership it needs must morph accordingly.
There is a clear need for the Secretariat to step up its There needs to be a focus on institutions and instilling
role in monitoring member states – in terms of the proper processes and safeguards. Whether ASEAN
deliverables and publicising relevant Key Performance and its member states are prepared to do this, however,
Indicators (KPIs). But this is an extremely touchy is another question. -- Thomas Daniel is Senior
matter for member states – with many fearing even an Analyst in Foreign Policy and Strategic Studies, ISIS
indication that the ASEAN Secretariat could become Malaysia.
more like the European Commission, with executive
powers that occasionally surpass those of national
governments. Another common narrative when it comes
The Post-INF Treaty Crisis: Background and Next Steps

The 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) “material breach of the treaty” and announced the
Treaty, negotiated and signed by U.S. President Ronald United States had formally withdrawn from the INF
Reagan and Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, was one of Treaty. According to The Wall Street Journal, U.S.
the most far-reaching and successful nuclear arms intelligence agencies have assessed that the Russians
reduction agreements in history. The treaty led to the possess four battalions of 9M729 missiles (including
verifiable elimination of 2,692 U.S. and Soviet missiles one test battalion). The missiles are “nuclear-capable,”
based in Europe. It helped bring an end to the Cold War according to the Director of National Intelligence, but
nuclear arms race and paved the way for agreements to they are probably conventionally armed. Without the
slash bloated strategic nuclear arsenals and withdraw INF Treaty, the potential for a new intermediate-range
thousands of tactical nuclear weapons from missile arms race in Europe and beyond becomes
forward-deployed areas. The pact served as an increasingly real. Furthermore, in the treaty’s absence,
important check on some of the most destabilizing types the only legally binding, verifiable limits on the world’s
of nuclear weapons that the United States and Russia two largest nuclear arsenals come from the New
could deploy. INF-class missiles, whether Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START), which
nuclear-armed or conventionally armed, are is due to expire in February 2021 unless Presidents
destabilizing because they can strike targets deep inside Trump and Putin agree to extend it by up to five years.
Russia and in Western Europe with little or no warning.
What missiles could each side now deploy in the
Their short time-to-target capability increases the risk of
absence of the inf treaty? With the treaty’s
miscalculation in a crisis. Despite its success, the treaty
termination, each side is now free to develop, flight test,
has faced problems. A dispute over Russian compliance
and possibly deploy previously banned INF-range
has festered since 2014, when the United States first
systems in Europe and in Asia. President Putin stated
alleged a Russian treaty violation, and has worsened
Dec. 18 that in the event of U.S. withdrawal from the
since 2017 when Russia began deploying a
treaty, Russia would be “forced to take additional
ground-launched cruise missile, the 9M729, capable of
measures to strengthen [its] security.” He further
traveling in the treaty’s prohibited 500-5,500 kilometer
warned that Russia could easily conduct research to put
range. The Trump administration developed a response
air- and sea-launched cruise missile systems “on the
strategy in 2017 designed to put pressure on Russia to
ground, if need be.” This could involve additional
address the U.S. charges, but in October 2018, President
numbers of the 9M729 ground-launched cruise missile
Trump abruptly shifted tactics and announced the
on mobile launchers, as well as its Kaliber sea-based
United States would leave the agreement. On Feb. 2,
cruise missile system. Even before the Aug. 2
2019, the Trump administration formally announced
termination date, the Trump administration was
that the United States would immediately suspend
seeking to develop new conventionally armed cruise and
implementation of the INF Treaty and would withdraw
ballistic missiles to “counter” Russia’s 9M729 missile.
in six months if Russia did not return to compliance by
The fiscal year 2018 National Defense Authorization Act,
eliminating its 9M729 missile. On Aug. 2, U.S. Secretary
for example, required “a program of record to develop a
of State Mike Pompeo declared that Russia was still in
47
conventional road-mobile [ground-launched cruise the House of Representatives narrowly approved an
missile] system with a range of between 500 to 5,500 amendment introduced by Rep. Lois Frankel (D-Fla.) to
kilometers,” including research and development the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for
activities. Last year, Congress approved a Defense fiscal year 2020. The amendment prohibits funding for
Department request for $48 million in fiscal year 2019 missile systems noncompliant with the INF Treaty
for research and development on concepts and options unless the Trump administration demonstrates that it
for conventional, ground-launched, intermediate-range exhausted all potential strategic and diplomatic
missile systems in response to Russia’s alleged violation alternatives to withdrawing from the treaty and unless
of the INF Treaty. Earlier this year, the Defense the Secretary of Defense meets certain conditions. In
Department requested nearly $100 million for fiscal addition, with the end of the INF Treaty now official, it
year 2020 to develop three new missile systems that is critical that President Trump, President Putin, and
would violate the range limits of the treaty. One new NATO leaders explore more seriously some arms control
missile program of interest to the Pentagon is a arrangements to prevent a destabilizing new missile
ground-launched variant of the Air Force’s Joint race:Alternative Risk Reduction Strategies in the
Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile or the Navy’s Tomahawk Absence of the INF Treaty Any new U.S.
sea-based cruise missile. On Aug. 19, the Department of intermediate-range missile deployments would cost
Defense announced it conducted "a flight test of a billions of dollars and take years to complete. They are
conventionally-configured ground-launched cruise also militarily unnecessary to defend NATO allies or U.S.
missile at San Nicolas Island, California. The test missile allies in Asia given that existing air- and sea-based
exited its ground mobile launcher and accurately weapons systems can already hold key Russian and
impacted its target after more than 500 kilometers of Chinese targets at risk. Any U.S. moves to actually
flight." The missile was reportedly launched from a Mk. deploy these weapons are likely to prompt Russian and
41 mobile launcher. Another option under consideration Chinese countermoves and vice-versa. The result could
is a new intermediate-range ballistic missile designed to be a dangerous and costly new U.S.-Russian and
strike targets in China. The day after the formal U.S. U.S.-Chinese missile competition. Therefore, the U.S.
withdrawal from the INF treaty, newly confirmed U.S. Congress can and should step forward to block funding
Secretary of Defense Mark Esper said that he was in for U.S. weapons systems that could provoke a new
favor of deploying conventional ground-launched, missile race—and provide the time needed to put in
intermediate-range missiles in Asia “sooner rather than place effective arms control solutions. In January 2019,
later,” but “those things tend to take longer than you 11 U.S. senators reintroduced the “Prevention of Arms
expect.” China’s reaction has been negative. “If the U.S. Race Act of 2019,” which would prohibit funding for the
deploys missiles in this part of the world, China will be procurement, flight-testing, or deployment of a U.S.
forced to take countermeasures,” said Fu Cong, ground-launched or ballistic missile—with a range
director-general of the arms control department at between 500 and 5,500 kilometers—until the Trump
China's foreign ministry, speaking to reporters Aug. 6. “I administration provides a report that meets seven
urge our neighbors to exercise prudence and not to specific conditions. These include identifying a U.S. ally
allow the U.S. deployment of intermediate-range formally willing to host such a system and, in the case of
missiles on their territory.” a European country, demanding that all NATO
countries agree to that ally hosting the system. In July,
Alternative risk reduction strategies in the
the House of Representatives narrowly approved an
absence of the INF treaty: Any new U.S.
amendment introduced by Rep. Lois Frankel (D-Fla.) to
intermediate-range missile deployments would cost
the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for
billions of dollars and take years to complete. They are
fiscal year 2020. The amendment prohibits funding for
also militarily unnecessary to defend NATO allies or U.S.
missile systems noncompliant with the INF Treaty
allies in Asia given that existing air- and sea-based
unless the Trump administration demonstrates that it
weapons systems can already hold key Russian and
exhausted all potential strategic and diplomatic
Chinese targets at risk. Any U.S. moves to actually
alternatives to withdrawing from the treaty and unless
deploy these weapons are likely to prompt Russian and
the Secretary of Defense meets certain conditions. In
Chinese countermoves and vice-versa. The result could
addition, with the end of the INF Treaty now official, it
be a dangerous and costly new U.S.-Russian and
is critical that President Trump, President Putin, and
U.S.-Chinese missile competition. Therefore, the U.S.
NATO leaders explore more seriously some arms control
Congress can and should step forward to block funding
arrangements to prevent a destabilizing new missile
for U.S. weapons systems that could provoke a new
race:
missile race—and provide the time needed to put in
place effective arms control solutions. In January 2019, One option would be for NATO to declare, as a bloc, that
11 U.S. senators reintroduced the “Prevention of Arms no alliance members will field any missiles in Europe
Race Act of 2019,” which would prohibit funding for the that would have been banned by the INF Treaty so long
procurement, flight-testing, or deployment of a U.S. as Russia does not field once-prohibited systems that
ground-launched or ballistic missile—with a range can reach NATO territory. This would require Russia to
between 500 and 5,500 kilometers—until the Trump remove its 50 or so 9M729 missiles that have been
administration provides a report that meets seven deployed in western Russia. The United States and
specific conditions. These include identifying a U.S. ally Russian presidents could agree to this “no-first INF
formally willing to host such a system and, in the case of missile deployment plan” through an executive
a European country, demanding that all NATO agreement that would be verified through national
countries agree to that ally hosting the system. In July, technical means of intelligence. Russia could be
48
expected to insist upon additional confidence-building of lasting value, such a framework would require that
measures to ensure that the United States would not Moscow and Washington agree to extend New START
place offensive missiles in the Mk 41 missile-interceptor by five years. A third variation would be for Russia and
launchers now deployed in Romania as part of the Aegis NATO to commit reciprocally to each other—ideally
Ashore system and, soon, in Poland. (Russian officials including a means of verifying the commitment—that
have long complained to their U.S. counterparts about neither will deploy land-based, intermediate-range
the missile-defense batteries’ dual capabilities.) This ballistic missiles or nuclear-armed cruise missiles (of
approach would also mean forgoing President Trump’s any range) capable of striking each other’s territory.
plans for a new ground-launched, conventionally armed
INF Termination Is Bad.
cruise missile. Because the United States and its NATO
With the collapse of the INF Treaty, the only remaining
allies can already deploy air- and sea-launched systems
agreement regulating the world’s two largest nuclear
that can threaten key Russian targets, there is no
stockpiles is New START. Signed in 2010, this treaty
military need for such a system. Another possible
limits the two sides’ long-range missiles and bombers
approach would be to negotiate a new agreement that
and caps the warheads they carry to no more than 1,550
verifiably prohibits ground-launched, intermediate-
each. It is due to expire Feb. 5, 2021, unless Presidents
range ballistic or cruise missiles armed with nuclear
Trump and Putin agree to extend it for up to five years,
warheads. As a recent United Nations Institute for
as allowed for in the treaty text. Without New START,
Disarmament Research study explains, the sophisticated
there would be no legally binding limits on the world’s
verification procedures and technologies already in
two largest nuclear arsenals for the first time since 1972.
place under New START can be applied with almost no
Both countries would then be in violation of their Article
modification to verify the absence of nuclear warheads
VI nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty obligation to
deployed on shorter-range missiles. Such an approach
“pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures
would require additional declarations and inspections of
relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early
any ground-launched, INF Treaty-range systems. To be
date and to nuclear disarmament.”
The crisis of democracy by Tahir Kamran

In the recent years, democracy has revealed a ‘not so content with Boris Johnson, who epitomises several
benign’ side. Of course, most of us believe that villainies like bigotry and racism along with moral
democracy is the best system of governance and the turpitude. In Turkey, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, despite his
most inclusive in its character. It does not discriminate successes at the economic front, became a source of
on religious, ethnic or regional grounds. But certain societal convulsion when protests broke out against him
events unfolding recently, have unraveled that in 2013. Young protesters said that despite his
unequivocal trust in democracy, particularly the way it democratic mandate, he showed authoritarian
is being practised and the results it has yielded. Despite inclinations and was out of touch with the
democratic institutions having been firmly established newly-emerging middle class. Such characters are
in America by now, Donald Trump is firmly in the emerging thick and fast at the political scene in Brazil,
saddle. There is strong expectation that he will win France, Italy and even East European Hungary where
another tenure as US President -- to the horror of Viktor Orban is making waves because of his bellicose,
many. Many analysts and political commentators even ultra-rightwing policies. His phrase "illiberal democracy"
from Pakistan envied and eulogised India for its is as good a name as any for the form of government that
persistence with democratic rule, which never faltered many political theorists will ask us to guard against.
despite the country being beset with problems like ‘Illiberal democracy’ underpinned by their desire to
caste, poverty, communalism, language and ethnicity, exclude, binds all these demagogues together and is the
to mention only some of them. Now with Narendra cornerstone of their populist political appeal. In Germany,
Modi at the helm despite his blemished past and the neo-Nazi ideology is permeating fast. In the ancient
not-so-enviable present, I am sure many of them are Greece, it was this form of democracy that provoked
scratching their heads in sheer frustration and agony. Socrates to disparage it as demagoguery, from which the
Of course, none of us will like to see a Hindu theocracy Greek intelligentsia feared the most. What is more
flourishing at the expense of minorities across our alarming about the current state of politics is its
borders. But how have Modi and Amit Shah secured a similarity to the political trends prevalent in Europe in
thumping victory despite his dismal performance in his the 1930s. Political history, despite my strong caveat to
first tenure, is a question that continues to bother that notion, seems to be repeating itself. And this time it
many. His comrade in the politics of exclusion, may not be confined to Europe only. Its influence is likely
Benjamin Netanyahu, probably the longest serving to encompass Asia, and both the American continents.
Prime Minister of Israel, deserves particular mention The leftist ideology, as well as politics of the left, (that
here because he might have served as a role model for also includes centre-left or liberal left) have faded away
Modi with respect to ‘settling’ the issue of Kashmir. By as an anachronism. With the leftist challenge having
revoking Article 370, the BJP government is turning vanished almost completely, ultra-right-wing ideologues
Kashmir into another Gaza. Also, Netanyahu considers in major polities are in a walk-over situation. Importantly,
Israel as a homeland for the Jews only; Modi thinks the the nexus between the popularly-elected Trump and
same way about India and earnestly aspires to Modi (demagogues) and the capitalist class comprising
saffronize it. As if these leaders and their antics in the opulent families and business-houses, such as the
name of democracy were not enough, United Kingdom, Ambanis, the Bajaj family or in the case of Trump, New
the mother of democracy and liberal values has to be York Jets owner Robert Woody Johnson, Sheldon
49
Adelson, etc, portends a spiral to crisis, the impact of a storm." He insisted that only those who had thought
which will be worldwide. A nexus of such capitalists is about issues of the state rationally and profoundly should
bound to throw up a reaction of equal intensity; the be entitled to cast vote. Thus, Socrates was not amenable
only question is when that reaction will transpire. It to the idea of a popular democracy which allows
seems that it is just a matter of time. The examples everybody to participate in the electoral process. Aristotle
mentioned above may appear to be separate cases thought almost the same. Aristotle on democracy, says
where problems are driven by specific policies, philosopher and writer Julian Baggini, is "more relevant
personalities, and historical context. But there is a than ever". Accordance to Baggini, "Aristotle’s favoured
common thread: the institutions. According to Francis form of government was the rule by the best over the rest,
Fukuyama, institutions are ‘stable, valued, recurring an aristocracy based on merit rather than blood. He even
patterns of behaviour" that persist beyond the tenure thought a good monarchy was better than a democracy.
of individual leaders. They are, in essence, persistent Partly at least, Aristotle’s criticisms of democracy were
rules that shape, limit, and channel human behaviour.’ insightful and prescient. They are more relevant in the
Whenever polity fails to properly evolve institutions or age of Trump, Modi and Boris Johnson than ever.
the institutions become subservient to private interests, Aristotle’s main criticism of democracy was ‘that it
governance is bound to run into a crisis. That is quite undermined the rule of law.’ A functioning state requires
evident in the two cases of USA and UK. It almost everything to be governed by laws. Otherwise, checking
holds true in the case of India, too. When private those exercising power becomes difficult. Consequently,
interests hold precedence over the democratic they do what they want and tyrannize the marginalised
majorities, institutions need to reinvent themselves. sections. ‘In a pure democracy, the will of the majority is
This is not coming through. Consequently, democracy sovereign, not the law, not the state.’ If the people decide
is in a deep crisis. A factor contributing to this situation
someone should be executed, they are executed and no
is the rigidity of the rules and of the ideas supporting law against capital punishment can stop that. Now it is
them. While delving into the conceptual genealogy of important to note that Aristotle considers ‘the will of the
democracy, one ends up with ancient Greece as its people’ as a sort of binary opposite to ‘the rule of law’,
wellspring. As is well known to the scholars and serious which he thinks is the sole preserve of the elite. Probably
students of politics, demos denotes village in Greek or, the class hierarchy had the starkest of its manifestations
as it is invariably translated, deme. The deme was the in ancient Greece that reflected in the thoughts of its
smallest administrative unit of the Athenian state, like seers." In the modern age, with the Western world having
a voting precinct or school district. Demos had another undergone the experiences of Enlightenment and French
meaning to the Athenians that was people, the body of Revolution, the political thought and practice made
citizens collectively. The other part of the word cracy several advances and brought forth the synthesis between
also has its origin in Greek and means rule, the ‘will of the people’ and ‘the rule of law.’ Obviously, the
government, or governing body. Today the assertion Western Europe is its central locus. England typified the
that democracy and philosophy are the two most democratic dispensation with the will of the people as its
significant contributions of the ancient Greece to the cornerstone, Germany laid down the foundation for a
human civilisation may not appear far-fetched. It is very strong bureaucratic set-up, which saw to it that law
striking, in fact, to learn that one of ancient Greece’s is executed in its true letter and spirit. In the 19th century,
laudable achievements, philosophy, had looked these two streams converged in England. After
askance at its other achievement, democracy. undergoing the upheavals of the severest kind, (including
Intellectual giants like Socrates and Aristotle the two world wars) major countries from Western
considered democracy vulnerable to promotion of Europe embraced the system whereby the will of the
demagogues, not conversant with the art of governance. people as well as the proper execution of law through
That is exactly what the critics of democracy say in efficient bureaucracy became the norm. The rule of law,
Pakistan. Particularly in the days of dictatorship in understood as rules that are binding even on the most
Pakistan, that rubric is widely circulated. But let’s get politically powerful actors in each society substituted the
back to the conceptual perspective of democracy from system already in existence, which was once defined
the Greek days. In the Dialogues of Plato, Socrates is through the institution of kinship. Last of the principles
depicted as entertaining a hugely negative view about vital for any democratic system to be affective is
the whole business of democracy. In book six of The democratic accountability through parliament. In this
Republic, Plato describes Socrates conversing with a day and age, leaving aside Scandinavian nations,
character called Adeimantus and exhorting him about nowhere in the world all three principles on which the
the flaws of democracy by comparing a human society democratic system hinges, seem to be operational. In the
to a ship. Socrates asks in his usual style, "If you were Asian states that have seen economic development in the
embarking on a journey by sea, who would you ideally last couple of decades, democratic accountability is
want to oversee the vessel? Just anyone or people well conspicuously non-existent. Strong leadership and
versed in the rules and the art of seafaring?" The latter unilateralism emanating out of that semi-authoritarian
of course, says Adeimantus, "so why then," responds set-up is being practised in a ruthless manner. India is a
Socrates, "do we keep thinking that any old person glaring example of a flawed democracy where one faction
should be fit to judge who should be the ruler of a and one man rule the roost. Do we need a different
country?" Socrates’ point is that "voting in an election system for the Asian and African countries is a question
is a skill, not a random intuition." And like any skill, it
worth asking in the circumstances. That question
needs systematic instruction. Letting the citizenry vote becomes more relevant with India having gone despotic,
without proper education is "as irresponsible as if not fascist, with the ascendancy of Messrs Modi, Amit
putting them in charge of a trireme sailing to Samos in Shah and Yogi Adityanath.
50
Pakistan’s changing geopolitics by Dr Naazir Mahmood

The geopolitics of Pakistan is still stuck with the to power rests on four pillars: Military strength and the
thinking prevalent in the previous century. Pakistan’s willingness to use it; Surplus economic energy to enable
geopolitical strategy is marred by its obsession with it to provide aid and invest in other states; Ideological
India and Kashmir, resulting in a disproportionate leadership that serves as a model for other nations; And
stress on religious identity that has spawn a plethora of a cohesive system of governance. Let’s have a brief
problems for its governments, people, and the state overview of how Pakistan has fared in geopolitical terms
itself. Pakistan’s perpetual inability to establish good in the 20th century.
relations with three of its major neighbours i.e.
Geopolitical strategy of Pakistan in the 20th
Afghanistan, India, and Iran; and even with Bangladesh,
century Right from its inception in 1947, Pakistan has
shows a prolonged paranoia that has consumed not only
faced the challenge of establishing good relations with
precious resources but has also turned Pakistan into a
four major countries: America, China, India, and the
country still unable to give its citizens a decent
USSR. Though, Afghanistan and Iran were its
education, basic health services, and even safe drinking
immediate neighbours, they figured less in Pakistan’s
water. The recent annexation of Kashmir by the BJP
geopolitical considerations. Afghanistan was not happy
government in India has exposed not only the Modi
at the creation of Pakistan as an independent country,
government as a violator of human rights and the UN
and Iran was concerned about Balochistan being taken
resolutions, but has also put Pakistan in a difficult
over by Pakistan. If Afghanistan was under the Soviet
situation in which its narrative of Kashmir being the
influence, Iran had considerably good relations with the
jugular vein is being questioned by people. Pakistan’s
USA. For Pakistan, the Soviet Union was geopolitically
geopolitical strategy has had a reciprocal relation with
closer in comparison with the USA. But the religious
its domestic policies of denying people their democratic
inclination of the early Pakistani leadership, including
and human rights. An Ethiopia-like overhaul is needed
the first prime minister, Liaquat Ali Khan, and senior
in its geopolitical strategy, if Pakistan is to prosper and
bureaucrat and federal secretary, Chaudhary
survive as a democratic country that commands respect
Muhammad Ali, led Pakistan away from the Soviet
from the world community.
Union, into the lap of the USA. The occupation of the
Geopolitical analysis Geopolitical analysis is not a Hyderabad Deccan state and most of Kashmir by India
tool to predict when certain events would take place in in 1948 prompted Pakistan to seek support. The then
national and international politics. In the 1980s, nobody Indian premier, Jawaharlal Nehru, had a soft corner for
would have anticipated that the Soviet Union as a the Soviet Union since his youthful days. He was able to
country would disappear from the map of the world in forge better friendship with the USSR much more
1991. In early 2019, who could have foreseen in Pakistan quickly than Pakistan could do it with either America or
that the Indian occupied Kashmir would be annexed the Soviet Union. The acceptance of the Objectives
into India, and Pakistan would not be able to do much Resolution by the Constituent Assembly in 1949 set the
about it apart from delivering speeches at international religious tone of the polity to come. This religious bent,
fora, making phone calls to world leaders, and trying to though an internal matter, had a profound impact on
use electronic, print, and social media to keep a Pakistan geopolitical strategy too. The Soviet Union,
semblance of battle readiness. What use is there of any being a communist country was not likely to be a good
geopolitical analysis if it cannot tell you when something friend, or so the argument went. The war in the Korean
is going to happen? Well, not being able to tell the time Peninsula also brought Pakistan closer to the USA. The
does not mean that a geopolitical analysis is unable to decision of Liaquat Ali Khan to visit the USA instead of
forewarn you about an impending outcome of a series of the Soviet Union — from where the invitation had come
events. In the case of the USSR, the timing was not earlier — displayed Pakistan’s desire to align with the
known but the unfolding events did predict an ultimate USA rather than the USSR. The 1950s was the decade
collapse if certain measures were not taken. Similarly, in when Pakistan took two important turns. One, it failed
the case of Kashmir, again timing was less important to inculcate and develop a democratic polity within the
than the events preceding it. Indian Prime Minister country; and two, it continued with its tilt towards the
Narendra Modi had time and gain promised his USA, joining Cento and Seato; and offering airbases to
electorate that a second victory in elections for the BJP American planes to fly and spy over the Soviet territory.
would enable him to annex Kashmir. So, the use of a Even HS Suhrawardy, the premier of Pakistan for 13
geopolitical analysis is that it ‘focuses the attention of months in 1956-57, who was earlier considered a slightly
policy makers on conditions that are likely to bring left-wing politician, displayed his complete disregard for
about geopolitical change’ (Cohen, 2015). Geopolitical the opinions of his own party workers of Awami League
analyses also forewarn us about any changes in the who were mostly anti-imperialist. Suhrawardy not only
balance within the international system. For example, sided with the USA but also antagonised the Arab
the American invasion of Afghanistan in 2001 and of countries during the Suez Crisis. Perhaps the only
Iraq in 2003 did anticipate a prolonged war in this positive step he took in the geopolitical strategy of
region. A geopolitical analysis of Iran-Saudi conflict and Pakistan was initiating good relations with China. By
the Turkish incursion into Syria foretells of an 1958, it was clear that the 1956 Constitution of Pakistan
impending doom in this region which may plunge the was being trampled by Maj-Gen Iskandar Mirza who
territories from Istanbul to Islamabad and from the had become the first president of Pakistan after the
Caspian Sea to the Red Sea into turmoil. According to promulgation of the Constitution. The first general
Saul B. Cohen, an expert in geopolitics, a nation’s claim elections were supposed to be held in the country but
51
could not be held for two reasons that decided the opinion that the USA did play a role in the events of
geopolitical future of Pakistan. The first reason was 1977 in Pakistan. The hanging of Bhutto in 1979, on
Iskandar Mirza’s desire to continue as the ruler of the dubious charges of a murder, isolated General Zia
country. He knew that after the elections he would lose internationally, but his fortunes brightened when the
his post as the president of Pakistan. The second reason USSR invaded Afghanistan in December 1979, and the
had more to do with the geopolitical realities USA had to rely on General Zia. The geopolitics of this
surrounding Pakistan. The Muslim League, the region was about to see a new phase. The geopolitics of
founding party of Pakistan, had lost support of the the 1980s witnessed a complete dedication of General
people and a new countrywide left-wing party, National Zia to the civil war in Afghanistan. That civil war turned
Awami Party (NAP), had come into being. NAP had Pakistan into a wellspring for Afghan mujahideen
become very popular after the merger of Pakistan supported by Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the USA, and other
National Party of West Pakistan and the disaffected Western powers eager to see the Soviets entanglement
elements of the Awami League and the Jugto (popular) and collapse. Throughout the 1980s, General Zia almost
Front in East Pakistan. An impending victory for the forgot about Kashmir, trying his best not to annoy or
National Awami Party led by politicians such as instigate India. Rather, his entire efforts were
Bhashani, Bizenjo, Bacha Khan, GM Syed and Mian concentrated on Afghanistan as a trusted ally of Saudi
Iftikhar Uddin would mean a sea change in the Arabia and the USA. Pakistan did become a hotbed for
geopolitical strategy for Pakistan. The Pakistani religious militancy that was soon to affect the social
establishment led by the likes of President Maj-Gen fabric of the country. By the end of 1980s, the Soviets
Iskandar Mirza and Commander-in-Chief, General Ayub had withdrawn from Afghanistan, General Zia had died
Khan, could not tolerate a left-wing victory in Pakistan in a plane crash, and democracy had been restored —
leading to a possible government by NAP. The USA was albeit with shackles. The 1990s saw a musical chairs of
a keen observer of these developments and was more political governments in Pakistan led by either Benazir
than eager to precipitate a coup led by the army, Bhutto or Nawaz Sharif. The geopolitical strategy
toppling any nascent democratic dispensation Pakistan remained in the hands of the military establishment that
might have had. The 1960s saw an early closeness of never trusted both, Bhutto and Sharif. The biggest
General Ayub Khan with the USA, but this bonhomie gamble was the installation of the Taliban government
was shattered when the misadventure of 1965 war in Afghanistan who established a medieval-era
proved that America was not a friend but a master who theocracy that was misogynist and anti-human rights in
could not be trusted anymore. The geopolitics of the modern sense of these terms. During the second
Pakistan took a dangerous turn after the 1965 war. It government of Nawaz Sharif from 1997 to 1999, at least
became clear that India and Pakistan were not going to three important geopolitical events took place. First was
be friends anytime soon. General Ayub Khan had won the detonation of atomic devices by India led by the BJP
the presidential elections thanks to massive riggings in premier, Atal Bihari Vajpayee. This elicited an atomic
election by his state machinery; and his proclaimed response from Pakistan. The second event was the visit
victory in the 1965 war gave him a sense of pride and of Vajpayee to Pakistan to normalise relations with
self-confidence that he needed to continue as president Pakistan. Nawaz Sharif responded positively but the
of Pakistan. By the late 1960s, the tables had turned security establishments in both the countries were not
against General Ayub Khan and his own protégé General very happy about it. The third was the Kargil adventure
Yahya Khan was the new master of the country’s destiny. by General Pervez Musharraf that ultimately led to the
With growing discontent in East Pakistan, the first downfall of Nawaz Sharif on October 12, 1999.
countrywide general elections were held in 1970, Musharraf appointed himself the chief executive of
resulting in a landslide victory for Sheikh Mujib of the Pakistan.
Awami League. The refusal of General Yahya Khan to
Geopolitics of Pakistan in the 21st century At the
hand over power to the elected representatives on
turn of the century, Pakistan was one of the very few
various pretexts led to the military action against the
countries in the world that were ruled by a serving army
Awami League, culminating in the second Indo-Pak war
general who had mounted a coup against a
in 1971, and the creation of Bangladesh. The geopolitics
democratically-elected government and sent the
of Pakistan was now in the hands of its new leader, ZA
previous prime minister to jail. Just like General Zia was
Bhutto. Bhutto’s Islamic socialism was not a favourite
isolated in his early years, Musharraf also did not find
theory for the USA. His Pakistan Still Mills agreement
many supporters in the world community who
with the USSR; insistence on initiating Pakistan’s
considered him a usurper. Fortunately for General
nuclear programme, and rebuilding of the Pakistani
Musharraf, but unfortunately for the world, September
army had far-reaching impact on both internal and
11 attacks took place in America in 2001. Suddenly, the
external affairs of the country. Bhutto’s removal by
geopolitical situation changed and the US — with NATO
General Ziaul Haq in 1977 was the result of both internal
allies — braced for an attack on Afghanistan.
and external factors. Internally, Bhutto had antagonised
Afghanistan was ruled by the Taliban who were
not only the left-wing elements by imposing a ban on
reportedly harbouring the terrorists who planned and
National Awami Party, he had also become a target of
executed the attacks. For Musharraf, it was a godsend.
the right-wing parties in the form of Pakistan National
He wasted no time in accepting the US demands to side
Alliance (PNA). The PNA had refused to accept the
with it in its operations against the Taliban. Here was an
results of the 1977 general elections on charges of
opportunity for General Musharraf to prolong his rule
rigging, and hobnobbed with the army to topple Bhutto.
and be part of the so-called “War on Terror”. From 1996
The removal of Bhutto by General Zia was projected as
to 2001, Pakistan was one of the only three countries in
an international conspiracy. Some observers were of the
52
world who had recognised the Taliban as legitimate increasingly playing a greater role as evidenced by the
rulers of Afghanistan. As the world was wary of the CPEC; Saudi Arabia gives financial help to Pakistan and
Taliban, Pakistan had no qualms in according them full expects to toe its line in foreign policy as became clear
diplomatic protocols. After September 11, 2001, General when Prime Minister Imran Khan refused to attend the
Musharraf upended the geopolitical strategy of Pakistan summit in Kuala Lumpur and even chose not to send
and, apparently, he had no other option. General Foreign Minister Qureshi. The USA under Trump is
Musharraf’s regime supported the allied forces in fickle and wants Pakistan not to rely on China. Under
Afghanistan, and received wholesome rewards. General these circumstances, as the third decade of the 21st
Musharraf’s rule from 1999 to 2008 had two distinctive century dawns, Pakistan needs to overhaul its foreign
features: one, he supported the USA; and two, he policy. But that hardly seems possible under the present
genuinely tried to seek a solution to the Kashmir dispensation led by Imran Khan, but dominated by the
problem with India. Both attempts backfired and his security apparatus. Only a truly representative
unconditional support to the USA resulted in his government in Pakistan with civilian supremacy can
increasing unpopularity in the country and his Kashmir take drastic steps and that too would be possible only if
policy was not liked by his own constituency i.e. the the army and the judiciary both are supportive of
armed forces. After Musharraf, during the second democracy.
decade of the 21st century, Pakistan has vacillated
between China, Saudi Arabia and the USA. China is
How to Revive SAARC by Fateh-ul-Mulk Ali Nasir

As the world we live in continues to become more In fact, Thimphu is now the only South Asian capital
polarized and communal, multinational regional which lacks a Pakistani diplomatic mission.
groupings stand out as an example of what can be
Despite all the negativity there is a way forward – and
achieved when nations cooperate. Sadly in our part of
that lies in SAARC itself. Regardless of the tensions,
the world, the South Asian Association for Regional
SAARC has survived and neither India nor Pakistan can
Cooperation (SAARC) has fallen prey to the highly
afford to leave the organization. Pakistan is India’s
divisive social and political climate that is prevailing
gateway to the West and North and its only means of
here. It is of the utmost necessity that SAARC is revived
geographical access to Afghanistan and Central Asia.
for the benefit of South Asia and the entire globe. Last
The South Asian Free Trade Agreement (SAFTA), if
year I had written an article along similar lines but I’m
implemented, will lead to economic prosperity for the
afraid the optimism that I had then has been largely
entire Subcontinent. Since 2013 Pakistan is no longer an
dissipated.
insurgency-plagued land and is in a position to
The Indian Subcontinent today is perhaps more divided concentrate on trade and foreign relations. The
and belligerent than it has been for several centuries. upcoming SAARC Summit scheduled to be held in
The openly prejudiced right wing government in India is Colombo will be a prime opportunity for India and
using emotionalism as a central component of statecraft. Pakistan to meet and work towards reestablishing
Meanwhile, the political instability in Pakistan coupled commercial and cultural ties.
with the effects of decades of adventurism by state- and
Politics aside, South Asia is a vibrant part of the world.
non-state actors has created a toxic atmosphere in the
With its huge, young population, the majority of whom
region. The conflict along the Line of Control in
for the first time are now receiving an education, South
February gave us a brief but bitter taste of war and it can
Asia is in a position to shape the future of the global
be agreed that for once the Government of Pakistan
economy. Political bickering and communal mindsets
showed great maturity in how the crisis was handled –
will only disadvantage the people of Pakistan and India.
especially in that an all-out war was avoided. Just a few
The upcoming SAARC Summit should focus on SAFTA.
months later the opening of the Kartarpur Corridor
Even if India and Pakistan are reluctant to further
shows that despite our political and ideological
economic ties bilaterally at this time, they must at least
differences peace can be achieved and people-to-people
agree upon a framework for future implementation.
contacts revitalized. The Indian decision to boycott the
Pakistan can also take advantage of the summit and
last SAARC Summit that was scheduled to be held in
enhance trade relations with its Indian Ocean Rim
Islamabad in 2016 was a rash, immature and damaging
neighbors Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and the Maldives.
move. By doing so India undermined the entire
Cultural ties are what bind South Asia. Despite having
organization. In a way, the Indian side declared that
diverse climates, languages and beliefs South Asians in
they do not believe in regional dialogue if it involves
general share very similar cultural values and enjoy the
Pakistan. Furthermore by promoting the alternative
same forms of entertainment and recreation. Stronger
South Asian grouping, The Bay of Bengal Initiative for
cultural ties will result in regional integration in spite of
Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation
political differences based on security concerns and
(BIMSTEC), which excludes Pakistan, Afghanistan and
ideological paradigms. Culture and trade together will
the Maldives but includes all of the other SAARC
result in a humanistic symbiosis that will lead to peace
members plus Thailand and Myanmar, they have made
and prosperity. SAARC is almost always viewed in the
it clear that they do not want to see Pakistan having
prism of India-Pakistan relations but SAARC is actually
good relations with the smaller South Asian countries.
just as important for Nepal or the Maldives as it is for
Due to India’s bellicose attitude Pakistan has not even
India and Pakistan. In fact it is these smaller nations
been allowed to open an embassy in Thimphu, Bhutan.
that have the most to benefit from regional integration.
Pakistan and India have to take this into consideration:
53
that SAARC is not just an Indo-Pak one-upmanship club. magnanimity. Alongside the SAARC Summits, there
The lives of millions of people in the smaller member used to be another SAARC event called the South Asian
states can be improved if the two big brothers decide to Festival. This would take place either alongside the
put their differences aside and concentrate on helping SAARC Summit or at a different time and venue and
their younger siblings. This may sound like the plot of a would promote cultural ties. It would be ideal if
Bollywood drama but that essentially is the definition of Pakistan could volunteer to hold the next South Asian
SAARC – a large, quarrelsome South Asian family. Festival and invite all South Asian peoples to the festival
When the then leaders of South Asia, Presidents by facilitating visa-free entry for all SAARC citizens
Zia-ul-Haq, Jayawardene, Ershad and Maumoon wishing to attend. The attendance of heads of state
Gayoom, Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi and the would not be necessary, although some government
Himalayan monarchs Birendra Bir Bikram Shah Dev representation would be needed – and the South Asian
and Jigme Singye Wangchuck first met in Dhaka in 1985, Festival will be an event for people to see the beauty and
they came together with dreams of peace and diversity of SAARC and promote tourism within South
integration. When India and its close allies boycotted Asia. This would be a step in the right direction. India
the Islamabad Summit in 2016 they shattered that and Pakistan should thus turn a new leaf and make
dream. The ball is now in India’s court. As the largest South Asia a better place for themselves and their other
member, India must demonstrate maturity and South Asian siblings.
The failure of institutions in Pakistan by Rabia Ahmed

One of the most convincing theories regarding why statements liberally sprinkled with Arabic. That would
nations prosper or fail places the credit (or blame) be his ‘power-speak’, like the leaders the ultra-right
squarely on the institutions belonging to the country, on aspire to. In the public’s eyes he will then represent a
whether or not they function as they should, and member of the inviolate clergy, a ‘anti-Hindu’ hero.
whether or not they cater to the population without
discrimination. All other factors aside, this best explains Depending on the outcome of this event he may even
why countries like Pakistan have failed as spectacularly win support in society at large as a consequence of
as they have done. It is a lingering legacy of our colonial standing up to the authorities, something that few
past that we insist on being colonized by segments of people manage to do but many aspire to, because they
our own society, being ruled by persons whose have recognize the injustice that stems from it. After all, if a
little or no interest in doing their job. We still possess man such as Ehsanullah Ehsan could escape the security
cantonments which were originally garrisons for an authorities and leave the country taking his family with
occupying army, a total of 56 in the entire country of him, why can’t Maulana Aziz get what he asks for?
which 27 are in the Punjab alone. Government Ehsan was after all actually in custody, he was the
departments throughout the country are headed by a spokesperson for the banned groups TTP and JuA which
‘bara sahab’ to replace the ‘gora sahab’ who must be were responsible for the deaths of hundreds of persons
obeyed. He ‘rules’ without reference to rules, and rarely both civilian and military. Which institution worked in
for the good of the public he is supposed to serve. his case? Intelligence authorities were silent regarding
Democracy has not as yet filtered into the psyche of the the event which was in fact first publicized by an Indian
people, who still follow whatever smacks of colonial newspaper around a week after his escape. His escape
masters who left this country just over 72 years ago. was a discredit to the law enforcement authorities who
That psyche has now become so ingrained that people had custody of the man and allowed him to escape. Most
cannot see injustice for what it is, instead they view it as of all the very existence of the groups he belonged to,
the rightful exercise of authority. They have little choice and their continued existence, is a slap in the face of the
in many cases. Poverty and the threat of further loss of authorities who appear unable to control either the
income is one of the strongest motivations in any imprisonment of a known murderer or the defiance of a
human being’s life. Whereas for those who are more man who brazenly demands the restoration of his job
affluent it is the threat of loss of power that leads them and the allotment of land at the point of a gun. The
down unwise paths. If either of these segments of Prime Minister, if he genuinely wishes to do anything
society were truly subject to the law without taking into for this country, would do well to strengthen its
account their financial powers, they would receive institutions, to provide security and economic
justice. The latter seems to be how it is with Maulana well-being to its people so they may have a stake in life
Aziz who refuses to give up his position as the khateeb of as citizens. The way to do the latter is not to dole out
Lal Masjid in Islamabad and has holed himself up in the cash via programmes worth billions but to make sure
mosque with some armed supporters. In a country that the citizens’ ventures are protected by the law, and
where institutions worked, someone like this Maulana that they have the education to see what is right and
would probably have had a much greater respect for the wrong for themselves. (Pakistan Today, 23rd February,
repercussions of his actions, and he would have had 2020)
little support in society. Maulana Aziz however is relying
on force and the strength of his armed supporters to win
his argument, and to get him out of his tight corner at
the end of the day. He might even succeed so long as
he does not shave off his beard and gives vent to
54
Why Geopolitics Matters by Jeremy Black
Geopolitics is not inherently global. Indeed, one of its axiomatic—even if the relationship in question varied
greatest American manifestations was as greatly. What was less so was the situation after the end
gerrymandering, which was very much the geographical of the Cold War. The idea of a unipower that had “ended
politics of the locality. Yet, rather like the putative history”—providing a form of isotropic geopolitics, the
Amazonian butterfly, the locality has of course a wider concept advanced in the 1990s—could not last in the
impact. Most obviously, the unitisation of America in face of the reality and volatility of world affairs. This,
the form of its political configuration had a crucial indeed, has led to a competition to define the
consequence for its politics, as with the spread of slavery, international politics of the world that developed from
and continues to have such an impact. The global the beginning of the 2000s. Different accounts of
dimension, however, is not always ably handled by geopolitics were an aspect of this competition, and these
commentators for whom the detailed impact of local differences can be seen between, and within, individual
circumstances is subordinated to the alleged exigencies countries. Obvious contrasts are “national” ones at the
of a model, indeed classically their model. With many level of particular states, but there are also broader
commentators, this approach is frequently linked to a conceptual contrasts. A classic instance is provided by
tendency to depoliticize the politics of their own country, that between classical realist geopoliticians and critical
so that their prospectus also becomes the necessary one. geopoliticians who are particularly influential in
With his characteristically intelligent wry skepticism, Western academe, notably that of the United States. The
Alan Luxenberg is apt to understand this problem, and latter tend to reflect an almost axiomatic anti-Western
FPRI has been open, in a most welcome fashion, to approach and, in particular, to press for change in the
different accounts of global developments and American world. As such, these critical thinkers differ from the
needs. That openness flies in the face of geopolitics as classical school, which sought, and seeks, to appreciate
rhetoric, for the latter, the consciously or unconsciously the world as it is, or, in a more hostile light, not only to
subjective use of the approach, sits alongside, and as do so, but also to defend it accordingly. This is
part of a continuum, with the objective use. The key presented, by both supporters and opponents, as
instance is the concept of strategic culture, which is Realpolitik, but that is a construction as well as an
useful, in an objective sense, as an account of the objective description. In practice, there is political
long-term climate of opinion and assumptions that commitment on all sides of the discussion, but
frames policy. As such, it is also inherently political. Realpolitik approaches tend to seek an understanding of
This situation does not make geopolitics less significant, all players in order better to ground their analyses and
not least because it is readily apparent that the full proposals. In contrast, critical geopolitics frequently
range of the social sciences are inherently political, rests on a weak and naïve understanding of what it does
whether in content, analysis, or exposition. So also with not like. Adopting an inherently critical approach
the use of history. Indeed, geopolitics, which is where toward such overlapping categories as American public
geography, history, and international relations come culture, consumerism, the West (an abstraction that
together, is affected by the inherently political character somehow tends not to include the critic in question),
of each. To suppose some abstract or pure geopolitics neoconservatism, imperialist geopolitics, and claims to
that is not thereby affected is to offer a misleading objectivity is not only repetitive, discursive, and
neo-Platonic approach. For example, we might think we somewhat exhausting, but also tends to rely on
all know strategic over-reach when we see it, but the problematic theory, scant use of evidence, and argument
idea of such over-reach faces the serious conceptual by assertion. Alongside Manichaeism in the case of
difficulty of assuming a clear-cut measure of strategic self-styled critical geopoliticians comes the problems
reach and geopolitical concern, whether in military or in posed by projecting their own frame of reference onto
other terms. From a different dimension, current others. More positively comes the value of assessing
debates over the value, context, and future of geopolitics contrasting realist perspectives. These can relate to
can be fitted into the model of geopolitics as a form of particular countries, specific issues, individual time
response to problems. In short, it is, like most forms of sequences, and so on. These perspectives are most
analysis, a way to shape the complexities of existence. valuable when they engage with the dynamic and
The subject has been made more contentious by the contested character of strategic culture, while also
development of an explicitly critical geopolitics from the reflecting an evidence-based approach. For example,
1970s. While this offered a homage to post-modernism, there has recently been much academic discussion of
it drew in practice more clearly on a Marxisante support for Brexit as reflecting a form of regret for
tradition because such a rival geopolitics had been British imperialism and great-power status. This has
offered by the Soviet Union from the outset, and notably extended to a critique of Brexit alongside that of the
so with the Comintern. Marxist commentators in the interventionism of the “New Imperialism that was
West, such as J.F. (James Francis) Horrabin, provided a concealed behind the War on Terror.” In practice, this
wider stage for these ideas, as in his The Plebs Atlas analysis is deeply flawed. These policies were associated
(1926). The heavily politicized nature of geopolitics with the Tony Blair, Gordon Brown, and David Cameron
under the Third Reich led to the subject falling into governments, none of them noted for their Brexit
disfavor for a while, but to do so was to throw the baby sympathies. Moreover, House of Commons’ speakers
out with the bathwater. In practice, indeed, the idea of against interventionism include some prominent
“containment” was inherently geopolitical, as was the Brexiteers such as Julian Lewis. Brexit is/was a matter
Cold War as a whole. As an interlinked struggle in many more of Little Englanders than global interventionists.
localities between global ideologies and powers, this was In short, an engagement with geopolitics can reflect
55
what is by any standard intellectual confusion. China is development of Cold War policies, notably in the 1960s
of much greater significance than Britain and the state and early 1970s, but with more edge and with the
that appears to be pursuing geopolitical ideas most support of a strong navy, an element absent until
aggressively. Resting on the Maoist perception that relatively recently. There is also a greater degree of
foreign pressure had held China’s development back, geopolitical coherence than that offered by competition
there was a determination to project power, both in with the Soviet Union as a result of the Sino-Soviet rift.
order to prevent that situation and so as to be able to Indeed, the very different context then and now of
impose it on others. The traditional land-based focus on Chinese-Soviet/Russian geopolitics is a reminder of the
the development of expanding rings of security around a inherent volatility of the issue as well as its relationship
state’s territory has been applied to the maritime with a wide range of what can be seen as total
domain in a major expansion of geopolitical concern. politics/history. So also with the analysis of geopolitics.
“Near China” has been refocused to include the East and That also is inherently a product and aspect of this
South China Seas. Xinjiang and Tibet similarly reflect totality, rather than an element that can be readily
the ambition to extend power. Yet, the former leads to a separated out. This is apparent, for example, whether
clash with the United States as the land-based policy the frame of reference is the United States, China, or a
does not. Moreover, while the sea can seem a buffer in lesser power. As a consequence, analysis has to consider
the way that frontiers do not, the Chinese use of the the porous nature of government processes and the
situation is not operating in this fashion. Indeed, in part extent to which politics leads to a tendency to draw on a
as a consequence of significant domestic interest, naval wide range of influences and to entail the perception of
strength has become symbolic, ideological, and cultural, these influences. FPRI offers a bridge to consider these
as much as based on “realist” criteria of military, and other different accounts of geopolitics. It will work
political, and economic parity and power. Again, the best if it can maintain a humane skepticism toward any
strategic culture dimension of geopolitics has been ever supposedly universal account of the subject. (Foreign
Policy Research Institute FPRI, 17th January, 2020)
thus, but it is all-too-easy to forget the point. This is also
the case with the extension of Chinese ambition to more
distant locations. However conceptualized, this is a
Is imperial geopolitics coming back? by Tarik Oguzlu

The last decade has been full of various examples from latecomer in the struggle for building colonial empires
different parts of the globe demonstrating the growing across the globe. Friedrich Ratzel and Karl Haushofer
allure of geopolitical thinking in international politics. are the most notable German geopolitical thinkers and
Regardless if one talks about great powers like the their thoughts on geopolitics profoundly shaped the
United States, Russia, China and the EU, or middle foreign policies of Nazi Germany during the interwar
powers like Turkey, Iran, Germany, Brazil and India, years and World War II. To Ratzel and Houshofer,
foreign policy choices of many countries across the states are like living organisms that require lebensraum,
globe evince increasing doses of geopolitical calculations viz. living spaces, to survive in the anarchical
in the background. In order to better comprehend international environment. Just as individuals require a
today's geopolitical rivalries, one needs to first healthy body and mental condition, states are also in
understand how imperial geopolitics shaped need of fertile and defensible psychical terrain as well as
international politics in the past. Traditional geopolitics robust and uncontaminated people to survive in
tries to examine the relationship between geography international politics. Darwin's "survival of the fittest"
and politics and ascertain the impact of geographical characterization of interpersonal relations would apply
location and characteristics of states on the interplay of to interstate relations quite well. Hitler carried such
international political competition among them. thoughts one step further in arguing that the
Geopolitics was first understood as an objective German/Arian race was superior to all other races and
scientific exercise whose primary reason was to offer its purity needed to be ensured through the elimination
ironclad statements on the impact of geographical of Jews, transsexuals and Roma from the German
location and physical terrain on the ability of states to nation. The idea that countries' geographical location is
maximize their power in international politics. their destiny is very much informed by such imperial
Mastering the universe was considered to be paving the geopolitical thinking. Geography serves either as a
way for regional and global primacy. From the second power multiplier or a constraint on maneuvering
half of the 19th century until the onset of the Cold War capability. Traces of such thinking are quite visible in
era, geopolitics was mainly an imperial exercise the foreign and security policy practices of many
undertaken by great powers. Halford Mackinder, a countries across the globe. To give an example, Russian
geographer in the United Kingdom, is considered to be elites and people alike tend to believe that Russia should
the first important geopolitical thinker. His heartland never let hostile countries take control of territories to
theory assumes that the particular power that controls Russia's west and south mainly because Russia is highly
the Eurasian landmass would eventually control global indefensible from these directions. The reason why
politics and master the universe. Unlike Mackinder, Russian leadership, particularly the current Russian
Alfred Mahan, a military historian in the United States, President Putin, is very much against the idea of NATO's
argued that the road to global primacy in international enlargement toward post-communist countries in
politics would go through mastering oceans and other Central and Eastern Europe, as well as the Caucasus, is
sea lines. However, imperial geopolitics was closely that Russians believe their country would be
associated with Germany's foreign policy practices, a surrounded by hostile nations and this would be a direct
56
assault on Russian geopolitical interests in the Turkey also tries to leverage its transit country role in its
post-Soviet area. From the Russian perspective, Russia relations with the European Union. One of the core
is a great power and its geopolitical primacy in the arguments of those who think the European Union
post-Soviet area should be recognized by other great would do well to admit Turkey as a member is that
powers. Russia is also quite adept in using its Turkey would help lessen the EU's excessive reliance on
geographical location and rich natural resources in its Russian gas and oil resources. Turkey would simply
relations with neighboring countries. Being the main connect the energy thirsty European Union members to
gas and oil provider to many countries in Europe, energy abundant countries in the Caucasus, Central Asia
Russia believes that this provides it with huge leverage and the Middle East. The idea that geography is destiny
in its interactions with the countries that import such manifests itself in the security culture and practices of
resources. By periodically increasing the price of oil and other countries as well. For example, while the United
gas and by pushing further for the construction of States is mainly a sea power trying to project power
alternative pipelines tying Russia to individual across the world through its blue water navy and marine
European countries, such as the Nord Stream II pipeline forces, Russia, China and Germany are textbook
or Turk Stream pipeline, Russia has been forcing the examples of land powers. Land powers tend to invest a
countries lying in its neighborhood to toe its line in lot in their armies and defensive military capabilities
foreign policy. Russian geopolitical tradition is also mainly because they feel surrounded by numerous
immersed in the ideas that Russia is entitled to its neighboring countries. On the other hand, sea powers
sphere of influence and Russia is an imperial nation that do not have too many borders with other countries and
would do well to enlarge its sphere of influence if she benefit from their island status. The United States is
wanted to achieve its territorial integrity and preserve surrounded by two vast oceans to the west and east and
its sovereign democracy. Similar to Russia, China also it has relatively two weak neighbors to the north and
adopts a very lucid geopolitical approach in its foreign south. It is not located in close proximity to many
policy. While investing in area-denial and anti-access conflict-riven places in the world and developments in
military capabilities aims at curtailing the access of the far distant places tend to have a minor impact on core
United States to East China and South China Seas, the American security and economic interests. A similar
construction of massive infrastructure projects in the situation can be observed in the context of the United
larger Eurasian region and across the globe targets Kingdom, which is an island country and has long
connecting many states to China. Surrounded by more benefited from its splendid isolation. Rather than taking
than a dozen countries, Chinese leadership tends to an active role in great power competition among land
believe that China's territorial security would best be powers of the Eurasian region, both the United
ensured if all these countries were connected to China Kingdom during the 19th century and the United States
through diverse economic relationships and multiple during much of the 20th century played
infrastructural projects. The idea that China is the offshore-balancer roles. Whenever the prospects of a
Middle Kingdom and sits at the center of regional Eurasian land power laying claim to regional hegemony
politics in Asia is quite geopolitical. Another increased, they worked for the formation of
manifestation of such geopolitical thinking can be counter-hegemonic alliances and at times sent troops
observed in the context of Turkish foreign policy abroad to help defeat potential regional hegemons. The
practices dating back to the early years of the Republic. United Kingdom played such a role during the
It has already been a part of a Turkish security culture Napoleonic Wars in the early years of the 19th century.
that Turkey is the inheritor of the Ottoman Empire and The entry of the United States to World Wars I and II
all other countries that lie in Turkey's vicinity gained evinces a similar logic on the part of American
their independence through the wars waged against statesmen. The same logic is now quite evident in the
Turks. Such thinking seems to have led the majority of growing efforts of the United States to help contain the
Turkish people to internalize the ideas that Turkey is rise of China in East Asia. Leaving behind the
surrounded by enemies to all directions and Turkey's decades-old engagement policy of the previous
territorial integrity and national security would be administrations, President Trump has defined the rise
ensured if Turkey had a powerful military and pursued a of China as the No. 1 geopolitical challenge leveled
prudent and vigilant foreign policy approach. Lying at against American primacy in global politics. To make
the intersection of three different continents and sure that the United States maintains its hegemonic role
possessing vital sea passages like the Dardanelles and in global politics and China does not ascend to regional
Bosporus straits, Turkey is concurrently both secure and hegemony status in Asia, the Trump administration is
insecure. Its geographical location and the physical now pursuing a containment policy. Not only the scope
characteristics of its terrain can be seen as assets and of American military deployment to the region widened
liabilities in Turkey's relations with other countries. Forbut also the United States is now doing its best to ensure
example, while Turkey had to join the western camp in an anti-Chinese block emerges. Both the Free and Open
the early years of the Cold War era with a view to Indo-Pacific Initiative and the so-called Quad Initiative
resisting the territorial claims of the Soviet Union, it had
aim to create a counter-Chinese power block by pushing
to organize a military incursion into Cyprus in the the traditional American allies in the region to gear up
summer of 1974 to ensure that the island did not come their military expenditures and improve security
under Greek Cypriot rule, which would have otherwise cooperation among them. It is now past time to take
curtailed Turkey's maneuvering capability in the stock of imperial geopolitical thinking to make sense of
Eastern Mediterranean region. Similarly, Turkey feels current geopolitical rivalries. (Daily Sabah, 25th
exposed to myriad security challenges emanating from February, 2020)
the wider Middle East due to its proximity to the region.
57
Global Power dynamics and Pakistan’s foreign policy

By Abdul Samad Khan have maintained their presence, and the overt stages
(Daily Times, 19th February 2020) can be multiple from East to West. China has been one
There has been hardly any period in history to come of the main uplifters of Pakistan’s sinking economy and
across where the world has slunk off decorating its stage a supporter at the diplomatic front: Kashmir and FATF
for the performance of major events by the major actors etc. The US is a strategic ally of Pakistan along with its
resulting in the upward of the winners and the role for boosting Pakistan economy and its support for
downward of the losers. The Treaty of Westphalia 1648, Kashmir and FATF causes though being vital to
gave an end to the thirty-year war of religion and many Pakistan, this role on behalf of US does not exist in
states succeeded in getting independence. The same reality on dint of Indo-US strategic ties to contain China.
initiative also put forward the concept of nation-states, Keeping all these facts and figures in view, Pakistan
but notwithstanding its contribution to the world cannot suffer taking a side of either of the two rather it
tranquillity, the trigger of interests kept going on. Early suits well to draw a balanced approach towards the
20th century came across World War 1 along with trigger of these two global powers. Thus, Pakistan has
another trigger which was about to begin right at the succeeded in devising a balanced policy towards this
middle of the same century-WW2. proxy while keeping intact the same bilateral ties with
Moments later, the world decorated its stage for the both countries: overlooked US’ concerns over CPEC and
proxy war between two powerful blocks of the world. is offering a role of a mediator between US and Iran etc.
The new cold war stretched itself to 1991 when it Likewise, the growing Indo-US nexus are impediments
stopped its function with the dissolution of the former to Pakistan’s security interests in general and Kashmir
USSR into several republics. Thus, the world prepared cause in particular. Kashmir saga has not been failing in
itself to host a single power for the upcoming few years maintaining its place in Pakistan foreign policy since
until the time when it stood at the brink of the economic 1947 when it turned a disputed piece of land between
depression in 2008-9, which along with the Pakistan and India.
interventionist nature of US prompted the resurgence of
Though difficult in nature, Pakistan is trying its best to
Russia and the emergence of China. These two joined
give a durable solution to the dispute. For these
the US and turned the unipolarity into multi-polarity.
purposes, it has knocked at the doors of the
The US has been trying its best to intact its sole
international community and global powers. Pakistan is
hegemony over the whole globe for a long time. It needs
constantly asking for US’ role to resolve the issue. The
the removal of the two main hurdles: China and Russia,
US is persistently assuring Pakistan of its role in
from its way to retain its global hegemonic posture.
bringing an everlasting solution to Kashmir cause.
Therefore, the proxy has already been kicked off among
However, it is not the case in reality because the US
these great players for keeping a hold over international
seems to be reckless to act upon its words. The main
affairs. The Indo-pacific region, the Middle East etc, are
forces behind US’ unwillingness, are its strategic ties
the stages which have been decorated for this proxy.
with India and its need of India being an indispensable
Breathing in such an arena which hosts massive security
partner to contain China. Thus, it has become an
and diplomatic pressure, it seems quite impossible for
undeniable factor to the makers of Pakistan’s foreign
countries like Pakistan with an undeniable geostrategic
policy to look it seriously. They are doing their best to
and diplomatic posture, to turn its back to such
devise a policy which suits them well- as Pakistan
compulsions generated by the ongoing developments.
reprimands Indo-US ties being detrimental to its
Adding to the above, the Muslim world politics also
Kashmir cause. In addition to criticism, Pakistan is also
succeeds in holding its place in Pakistan foreign policy.
looking for the support of other major global and a
The trust deficit on the part of the West towards
regional nod for its Kashmir case. Let’s move towards
Pakistan being a determinant of its foreign policy is
the Middle East which too has a key role in Pakistan
being replied with the promotion of a soft image of
foreign policy. The Israel-Palestine conflict has made
Pakistan via tourism etc. Likewise, the terrorism caused
the region able to experience evergreen unrest: the first
FATF saga is being wholeheartedly dealt with. At all
Arab-Israeli war, the second Arab-Isreal war, US- Iran
these fronts though being tough and replete with
tensions etc. Pakistan is supporting Palestine’s case
hurdles to Pakistan foreign policymakers, they are being
against the illegal settlement of Jews backed by West in
dealt with at the expense of their remarkable efforts.
general and by the US in particular. It has stressed the
The proxy between the two major powers of the world:
solution of Syria and Iran-US conflicts through
China and the US, appeals for Pakistan foreign to be
negotiations. In Iran -the US tensions Pakistan, despite
devised in such a way as to support one of the two
being a strategic ally of the US and a neighbour and an
combatants against the other. This, being a hurdle,
Islamic counterpart of Iran, has adopted a balanced
demands a balanced approach towards the trigger of the
approach with its emphasis on the solution of the
two major powers and Pakistan is leaving no stone
conflict through durable negotiations. Thus, though
unturned to adopt the middle way. The US tries its best
being an obstacle to our Pakistan foreign policy
to contain China so as to hold its head high in world
formulators, they have succeeded in striking a balanced
affairs being a sole superpower. China is, on the other
foreign posture to a considerable extent. Likewise,
hand, adopting every possible measure to go through
another power dynamic in the region can be
this proxy successfully. Thus, the stage is decorated for
experienced in the form of a proxy war between Iran
this proxy covertly is the Indo-Pacific region: the South
and KSA triggered by political, ideological and economic
China Sea and the Indian Ocean, where both powers
forces, with its posture being a hurdle and determinant
58
to Pakistan foreign policy. This trigger demands diplomatic nod of Malaysia and Turkey. Thus FATF
Pakistan to remain in the middle and play the role of a conundrum hardly fails in securing its place in Pakistan
mediator between them thereby to ensure tranquillity foreign policy and the matter of fact is that it is trying
and progress in Ummah. KSA is Pakistan’s prime time from head to toe to get rid of it. Likewise, West has
economically with its best homage for its hostage of two revealed its trust deficit vis-a-vis Pakistan on dint of the
of the most important religious places in Islam: Makkah globally promoted narrative against Pakistan being a
and Madina. Likewise, Iran is Pakistan’s neighbour and terror-financing state and this factor, too, can hardly be
provides a cheap source of energy and power along with set aside by Pakistan’s foreign policy and is being dealt
a horde of Shia population living in Pakistan and being with in a satisfactory way since the new government has
vital to Pakistan’s national harmony and security. taken the reign of the country.
Keeping all these in view Pakistan is trying to strike a
The global narrative vis-a-vis Pakistan terrorist face
balanced approach towards the proxy of these two
is being replaced with the promotion of a soft image via
powers: remained off from becoming a part of the
tourism by the recent government. Pakistan has been
KSA-led block against Yemen though joined the 34
ranked as the best international holiday destination,
countries Islamic military alliance, trying its best to
according to Coned Nast Traveller, a luxury and lifestyle
reconcile between the two through negotiations and its
travel magazine. The UK has changed its travel advisory
role being as a mediator has been appreciated. The
towards Pakistan followed by the United States of
dormant and passive role of OIC towards the resolution
America. It was made possible with the sincere efforts of
of grave conflicts and challenges of Ummah has given
Pakistan to pose its soft image to the world. Thus,
birth to a would-be new initiative of leading Muslim
terrorism no doubt tarnished Pakistan respectful image
countries: Iran, Qatar, Malaysia, Turkey etc.
at the stage of the world theatre, yet it been dealt with
KSA did not participate in it as it perceived it being a well for the past few moments. Similarly, the role of
threat to its influence in Ummah. The split in Ummah Pakistan’s sinking economy in its foreign policy is rarely
has left Pakistan with two choices- either to attend the ignored. It would not be out of place to say that it is
new block which is said to have been the initiative of basically Pakistan’s staggering economy that compels it
Imran, Mahathir and Turkey’s president, or to nod not to strike a balanced international approach in major
before its financial supporter. Ultimately it yielded dynamics of global power. Let me tell you that Pakistan
before KSA and avoided attending the new initiative. It was in the heart with the KL Summit but in mind with
is perceived that Pakistan has lost its diplomatic KSA for it was treaded by the timely bail outs flowed by
credibility being a mediator and the diplomatic support KSA and its allies to aid Pakistan’s sinking economy.
for its longstanding desire for the peaceful solution of Therefore, in order to avoid such compulsions, Pakistan
the Kashmir dispute and for Its FATF cause. However, has adopted harsh and aggressive measures in its
to me, Pakistan has recovered from this blow to some economic sphere to boost up its economic strength.
extent on dint of several reasons: both Turkey and Apart from this, it has signed a free trade agreement
Malaysia looking for Pakistan’s consumer market, PM’s with China to avail of Chinese markets. CPEC is an
recent visit to Malaysia and Turkey’s president take off undeniable step in the economic side which is said to
to Pakistan along with its position being a sole atomic have been for the purpose of meeting Pakistan’s energy
power in Ummah. Right at this moment when I am shortage, unemployment, infrastructure etc. KSA’s
writing my view here, Turkey’s President is addressing investment in CPEC is remarkable. Thus, Pakistan is
the joint session of the Pakistani parliament. He is doing its best at its economic front to boost it up thereby
assuring Pakistan of its support on Kashmir cause in to play its desired role in world affairs. In a nutshell, it is
words,” Kashmir means and matters the same to Turkey not okay to say that a country like Pakistan with its
as it is to Pakistan. I think that’s the living posture of geostrategic and diplomatic credibilities will escape
Pakistan’s influence at its diplomatic front. Moreover, from the security and diplomatic pressure caused by the
terrorism has caused irreparable damage to Pakistan in events occurring around it. Pakistan is facing the
multiple ways. The mismanagement of finance-money aforementioned challenges to its foreign policy vis-a-vis
laundering, apart from huge damage to various sectors: its security and diplomatic posture and is, if to say,
loss of thousands of people’s lives and economy left fighting well with all of them. Its balanced approach in
deteriorated, is detrimental to the national respect at the US-China trigger, the role of a mediator between
the global front. Pakistan has been placed under a grey KSA and Iran can hardly be set aside. Pakistan’s efforts
list by FATF on dint of poor financial management. for erasing global doubts about its terrorist face and
Thus, Pakistan is doing its best to act in accordance with replacing it with the promotion of its soft image via
the desired advice being given in the form of almost tourism are bearing the fruits. Likewise, its role at the
27/28 point- a list by FATF, out of which 20 points have economic front and in security ground possesses
been declared satisfactory. Pakistan is leaving no stone credibility. Above all, though challenges they might be
unturned to acquire diplomatic support so as to get off to its foreign policy, Pakistan is tackling them all to a
the grey list thereby to avoid sliding into the blacklist. It considerable extent.
is trying to get the diplomatic nod of the global
influential players and has succeeded in winning the
59
Tragedy of Pakistani State, Society & Democracy
Muhammad Jahangir Kakar these forces of status quo. These efforts have belittled
(Global Village Space, February 18, 2020) the general civic sense in the people and the siphoning
Society and government are the eerie interdependent out of citizens’ democratic fertility in their sphere of
variables in the state biomechanics. At times the national lives. This has tarnished the civic life pattern
government becomes a larger than life reality and takes creating unbridled socio-political dis-ownership of the
precedence over the state while at times this equation is state by the people. The greater distancing of the people
balanced through an actively vigilant society. Society from the government is the reason of rampant bad
functions in an organized manner which influences the governance in the country. The constructive feedback
government in both positive and negative manners from the citizens who are the eyes, ears and brains of
through the institution of Civil Society Organisations the government is marred by willful limitations
(CSOs) that are supposed to guarantee the protection of superposed by the forces of status quo and the feedback
citizenry rights in imparting them a proactive share in is projected as blind, deaf and nonsense.
the decision making processes and in ensuring the
Nexus between Civil Society Organisations &
pervasiveness of democratic values. Sadly, in Pakistan,
International Aid Like the fickle and power ridden
the governance superstructure, by design, hampers the
democracy of our country, our large number of so called
evolution of any proactive civil society organizations,
CSOs with the meager exception of very few ones have
causative perhaps of the still actively lit colonial legacies
shaken hands in the lucrative but dark business of
and seditious traditions of state management. This has
international aid which in the words of Graham
brought to closure the possibility of creating a citizenry
Hancock is ‘a group of rich and powerful bureaucracies
aware of its conscious legal rights and duties on the one
that have hijacked our kindness’. The activities mainly
hand and on the other desolating the fertile opportunity
carried out by the so called CSOs revolve round the
of constructive feedback to the government planning
pivot of handful of aid distributed unevenly amongst
and policies. Thus the dissociation of the government,
them which in turn is coming out from the solemnly
vaguely referred henceforth as the state, from the
intended taxpayer’s pocket of the West. These so called
citizenry has become ever widened and the adroit
CSOs have therefore dissipated from their essence so
intermediary of civil society organizations becoming the
least could be expected of them in terms of positive
outmoded factor. Darwin had his “Missing Link” in his
socio-political utility in connecting the people with the
“Origin of Species” and we have ours in the origins of
government for ensuring good governance, rule of law
democracy with the adrift CSOs.
and all those fairy tales of sweet democracy. The state as
Democracy of Houses & families There are two Greeks put it exists for the virtue of the people and the
intimately collusive issues impeding the rise and virtue lies in the state’s capacity, ability and willingness
succession of real-time civil society organizations in for doing the public good. Especially in all practiced
Pakistan. Firstly, it is the power politics pattern which democracies of the world, the systems are people
has painted dismal the hopes of any real democracy in inclusive and the decision making processes are duly
the country. Our democracy is rooted in certain people, partaken by them. This curtails the government’s
houses and families and has been used as an instrument discretion, as government is power composed so this
of public beguiling. Secondly, with such superstructure composition needs restrain. The civil society
in pose above, the downward functioning governance organizations are the restraining agents which check the
structure has also colored itself with same hues of power decent use of power which without the fears of
and prowess begetting a distinct status quo of eavesdropping tends to go wild and corrupt absolutely.
manipulative perpetuation. The bureaucracy at the The presence of a civil society in the government’s
bottom layer supporting the political coveted junta chamber of power limits the use of authority in a
above reinforces this system thus hijacking the decision discretionary manner also providing the government the
making processes. And it leads to privatisation of the ability to make full use and take full advantage of the
whole state management paraphernalia to distinctive citizens’ common but priceless indigenous intellect
clouts of reserved groups. The citizenry hence is not rather than fixing the indigenous issues with some
near by any means in the state mechanism of decision imported pearls of wisdom deceiving both of Time and
making let alone the constructive and democratic of Space. Our Society has developed severe symptoms of
feedback which these organizations could offer to the stress and anxiety. And these are signalling similar
state apparatus. The governance pattern is thus formed disorientations to the equivalent variable of state which
up of the power politics and power ridden bureaucracy in turn is simultaneously cropping up the double
which would never agree on anything curtailing their jeopardies of social insensitivity and political
decision making processes and bringing any educated insensibility. The biggest challenge that withstands the
and sensible reduction or rationalization in their wild CSOs network is the governance pattern of our country
power mechanics. What follows next is the long term which is mainly casted by the fattened bureaucracy and
indoctrination in people that they are not literate the power ridden political elite who are the major
enough to understand their issues and to find means stakeholders in the status quo who would never come to
and ways to resolving these. This deliberate demeaning terms on sharing the power in the form of decision
in fact has produced a citizenry which has resulted into making processes with the common folk of the society.
an idle liability on the government, least to speak of Both of these forces of the status quo have internalized
their creative pro-activism and resulting cultivability. the paranoid self-claim of being super geniuses and the
The management processes of state administration are jack of all trades forgetting they are simultaneously the
exceedingly and purposefully made super-confusing by master of none!
60
Making CPEC Work: Nexus Between Pakistan & China
Written by- Ikram Sehgal economic relations with India, China’s India’s biggest
Global Village Space, February 22, 2020 trading partner ($85 billion). Last year alone India’s
At a panel discussion organized by Pathfinder and exports to China increased by 40 per cent. PM Advisor
Martin Dow Group during Davos 2020 Dr Abdul Hafeez Hafeez Shaikh informs us that Pakistan has a
Shaikh spoke about understanding CPEC and making it population of 210 million and a current GDP of about
work. He provide the context of CPEC by sharing the $0.3 trillion. The per capita GDP of $1,630 puts
“Big Facts” about the two economies of China and Pakistan at number 145 globally. Its average historical
Pakistan, the current international economic growth rate is just below five per cent. Pakistan has been
environment, the main features of the Belt and Road unable – throughout its history – to have a sustained
Initiative (BRI) and CPEC. Key considerations critical period of high growth rate in its national income. The
for the initiative to ‘work’ i.e., live up to its fullest ‘growth spurts’ it has experienced have never lasted for
promise were highlighted by him. more than four years. Dr. Hafiz Shaikh says that a big
and continuing failure of all governments – and the
The Economic Disparities between Pakistan and business community – has been the inability to
China China and Pakistan have strong diplomatic, integrate the Pakistani economy globally, or even
political and military ties. However the economic regionally. The country has never excelled at exports or
interaction has been limited, the great economic succeeded in convincing others to bring their capital to
transformation of China not using reflected in our Pakistan. This failure to form alliances and build
economic relationship. The CPEC is an attempt to link economic bridges with others is in contrast to the
the two economies, and, if designed and implemented experience of China and other successful emerging
properly, can be transformational both for Pakistan, economies. Two other big facts of Pakistani history have
Western China and the region at large. With a shaped – stunted – the economic trajectory of Pakistan
population of about 1.4 billion. China current Gross keeping it trapped at a low level of economic attainment.
Domestic Product (GDP), is $12 trillion, second only to One of the factors behind China’s success is its capacity
the USA ($19 trillion) and more than the combined to sell its products to others and form alliances with
GDPs of Japan, Russia, India and Brazil. The most global firms to bring billions of dollars of investment
globally integrated economy as annual trade surpasses into the country.
$4 trillion, and a foreign direct investment (FDI) stock
of $1.4 trillion. This economic rise is due to policies The first fact is that since its independence in 1947,
adopted by Deng Xiaoping and his successors since the Pakistan has continuously faced war. These include the
late 1970s. The scale of China’s success can be measured border conflicts, the Kashmir wars, the 1971 War, the
by (1) the average annual growth rate for about 40 years Cold War, the Soviet Afghan War, and the so-called
since 1978 has been close to 10 per cent, leading to (2), “War Against Terror”. These conflicts have been costly,
the lifting of about 800 million people out of poverty! If skewed public expenditure decisions, and created
leadership is measured by the impact on the lives of the perceptions about the country deterring international
most number of people, Deng Xiaoping is unrivalled in players from making longer-term commitments to the
the 20th century,” says Dr Abdul Hafeez Shaikh. country’s economy. Throughout its history, political
stability has eluded the country. No elected prime
According to our Advisor Finance to the PM, China faces
minister has completed tenure and the transitions have
some real challenges to improve its income per person
at times been unruly, costly for the country, and led to
(GDP per capita)currently at capita GDP ($9K) placing
the disruption of any emerging momentum in the
China at number 71st in the global rankings, well below
economy. The last few years have seen the Constitution
Switzerland ($80K), US ($60K), Singapore ($57K),
being restored, elections take place, the last transition of
Germany ($44K), Japan ($39 K), and also Turkey ($10K)
political power was relatively smooth with freedom of
and Malaysia ($10K). China’s strong average
expression on most subjects, Civil Society is a vocal,
performance conceals wide income disparities within
organising force.
the country with some regions (Shanghai, Tianjin,
Beijing, Shenzen) doing much better than others. The
The country’s potential remains large, being abundantly
difference between urban and rural areas is 3:1 and
endowed in natural resources with minerals, coal, water,
between coastal and inland areas is 2:1. Ranging
gas shoreline and a location at the centre of three
between $20,000 for some versus $5,000 for others,
regions. The hope remains that CPEC will be a great
these regional variations pose a threat to social cohesion
economic opportunity? With the global GDP around $75
and harmony, says Dr. Shaikh.
trillion, the growth rate in 2017 was 3.5 % and the IMF
projection for 2018 is 3.9 %. This relatively good
CPEC: A game Changer The Chinese success story
performance spread across many regions of the world.
includes political and economic stability, smooth
Just below the surface the mood of is anxiety and
transition of power from one set of leaders to the next,
concern. Contends Dr. Shaikh, “there is a fear that the
and a disciplined and inexpensive labour force. Also
room for manoeuver may be limited”. With the interest
leading factors has been China’s capacity to sell its
rates already of a very low point. The Fed target rate is
products to others (exports: $2.3 trillion) and form
1.5%, the ECB rate around zero, limiting the effective
alliances with international firms to bring hundreds of
use of monetary policy. Given a 1.5 trillion-tax cut,
billions of dollars of investment into the country. It has
increasing public debt to a dangerously high level,
a willingness to benefit from trade even with serious
China’s Private Debt is seen to be too high. While some
dispute with another country, the example being
61
countries are running chronic imbalances. China, (1) Eurasian Land Bridge (Western China to
Germany and Japan have chronic Current Account Western Russia)
surpluses while the US and the UK have chronic Current (2) Railway from Xinjiang to Germany (via
Account deficits. Kazakhstan, Russia and Poland)
(3) China Mongolia Russia Corridor (Northern
With the public rhetoric in the US and parts of Europe
China to Eastern Russia)
turning hyper-nationalist, protectionist and questioning
(4) Central and West Asia Corridor (Western
of the global financial architecture. With Britain has
China to Turkey)
opted out of the EU, hardliners have gained in the polls
(5) Indo-China Corridor (Southern China to
in some European countries. With US the Paris Accord,
Singapore).
North America Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), and the
Estimates of its overall size range between $4 and $8
TransPacific specially a break from the past, tariffs have
trillion, covering 68 countries in Asia Pacific, Central
been imposed on some items with threats of more.
and East Europe, with 40 % of the world’s GDP.
Expanded or entrenched these policies has led to
Estimates of its overall size range between $4 and $8
looming trade wars and a downturn in the global
trillion, covering 68 countries in Asia Pacific, Central
economy. Multilateralism and even free trade being
and East Europe, with 40 % of the world’s GDP.
questioned Chinese President Xi Jinping is offering an
Maritime Silk Road fosters connectivity the South China
alternative vision of connectivity, facilitation of trade
Sea, the South Pacific Ocean and the wider Indian
and integration of markets across regions and
Ocean (This is the first part of extracts from a talk given
continents. One Belt and Road Initiative (BRI)focuses
over dinner at the Schatzalp Restaurant on Tuesday, Jan
on connectivity and cooperation between China and
21, 2020 at Davos).
Europe/Asia. The ‘Belt’ covers the ‘Land’ and the
Maritime ‘Road’ covers the ‘Sea’. Land projects include:
Future of transatlantic relations and NATO

(Tariq Oguzlu, Daily Sabah Feburay 25, 2020)
As the dynamics of global politics revolutionize with the for other countries to emulate and the shrinking of the
emergence of a multipolar world order, debates on world alongside the globalization process have both
NATO's future have also accelerated. At stake in the facilitated NATO's smooth transition to a less political
discussions revolving around NATO's future is the military character and cloaked the differences within the
health of the transatlantic alliance as well as the ability transatlantic community. Stated somewhat differently,
of the so-called Western international community to the question of whether NATO was relevant or not did
deal with challenges of the new world order, of which not matter much during the heyday of the Pax
China's spectacular rise and Russia's geopolitical revival Americana in global politics. Saving their opposition to
under President Vladimir Putin's leadership stand out America's war in Iraq, inchoate attempts at developing
the most. common security and defense capabilities within the EU
framework and the decades-old burden-sharing debate
Burden or not? Since the end of the Cold War, allies within the alliance, NATO's European members mostly
have taken great pains to put NATO in good shape. toed America's line in foreign and security policy.
Enlargement toward the former members of the NATO's cohesion was mostly achieved during the
communist bloc in central and eastern Europe, unipolar era. Such initiatives as Mediterranean Dialogue
undertaking non-Article 5-kind crisis management and Istanbul Cooperation Initiative were commonly
missions in conflict-riven places, adopting a supported by NATO members. Invocation of Article 5,
comprehensive approach to security and improving commitments by European allies in the context of
institutional cooperation with other international showing their support for America's war against
organizations, from which the European Union stands transnational terrorism and the subsequent U.S.
out, have constituted NATO's transformation agenda. invasion of Afghanistan demonstrated NATO's
Absent traditional concerns over the territorial defense resilience. Establishing functional strategic partnerships
of member states following the evaporation of the with non-European countries like Japan, Australia, New
existential Soviet threat, the measures mentioned above Zealand and India were also successful attempts at
have been considered to ease the way for NATO's globalizing NATO. Moving to a multipolar order in
adaptation to the emerging world order. Despite many global politics in the last decade seems to have
military operations NATO undertook since the early resurfaced the debate on NATO's relevance and
1990s, NATO's relevance as a collective defense resilience. The rift between the two oceans of the
organization was mostly defined in political terms. In Atlantic appears to have widened.
hindsight, the time period between 1991 and 2008 is
considered as the unipolar era attesting to the unrivaled V. S. strategies The American position has been to
position of the United States in international politics. urge European allies, particularly Western European
The huge power gap between the U.S. and other global countries, to adopt a more strategic and geopolitical
powers, the declining prospects of great power, attitude toward Russia and China as well as improving
competition and war, the prioritization of soft their military capabilities to help lessen the burden on
power-oriented strategies over hard power strategies, American shoulders. Both the Barack Obama and
the allure of the EU integration process as a role model Donald Trump administrations urged European allies to
62
take on more responsibility than ever in contributing to which are more predisposed to see Russia from a
security in and around Europe so that the U.S. could geopolitical perspective, the challenge facing NATO's
handle the Chinese challenge more effectively and easily.European allies is to strike the right balance between
From Washington's perspective, NATO would remain maintaining their traditional commitment to the liberal
relevant to American security interest so long as it international order on the one hand and improving their
adopts a more global perspective and helps the U.S. deal hard power capacity to preserve their values and
with the Russian and Chinese challenges more postmodern achievements in the emerging great powers
effectively. Starting with the Obama administration and era. Given the growing American reluctance to commit
then continuing with the Trump presidency, the U.S. to European security and playing the leadership role of
seems to have defined Russia and China as its major the liberal international order, European allies would
geopolitical rivals aiming at hollowing out the American have to eventually develop their capabilities and
primacy in global politics. However undeclared, resilience to survive as a herbivorous power among
Washington has now been in the midst of a new Cold many carnivorous powers in today's world. It is not a
War with Moscow and Beijing. Unlike the U.S., Western coincidence that the current head of the European
European allies are quite reluctant to define Russia and Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, says that the
China as potential enemies. Even though they are current European Commission should act as a
cognizant of the fact that both Russian and Chinese geopolitical one. It is in line with such geopolitical
foreign and security policies have recently posed direct awakening that European allies have underlined China
challenges to the constitutive norms of the liberal as a systemic rival in EU documents while
international order, they think adopting a purely simultaneously signing off on NATO's latest
geopolitical perspective toward these countries would communique adopted in late 2019 that the rise of Russia
further erode the chances of multilateral governance in and China offers both opportunities and challenges. If
the emerging century. Russia and European allies live in the price to be paid for maintaining their postmodern
close proximity to each other, and security in Europe values and decades-old achievements alongside the EU
would be best achieved if Russia were incorporated into integration process were to adopt a more geopolitical
the European security architecture as a responsible vision with prioritizing hard as well as soft power
shareholder. Antagonizing Russia would be detrimental capabilities, NATO's European allies would likely do this.
to European security. Similarly, China's spectacular riseWhat is uncertain, however, is whether they would do
offers European allies immense opportunities to tap into.this within NATO or EU and whether they see the U.S.
Worth noting in this context is the never-ending as a true defender of the liberal international order or a
American demands that Germany stops cooperating typical realpolitik great power that believes in spheres of
with Russia in the Nord Stream II gas pipeline project, influence mentality and adopts zero-sum security
and European allies do not let China build the 5-G practices. The years ahead will be quite interesting to
infrastructure across the continent. Yet, it seems such watch.
American warnings fell on deaf ears. Apart from many
Central and Eastern European and Baltic countries
International law - The 'Deal of the Century' case

(Written by Ferhat Kucuk and February 25, 2020 in Daily Sabah)
One of the popular topics of discussion in the world
today is the infamous deal between Israeli Prime The brief history Palestine came under the British
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and U.S. President mandate following the collapse of the Ottoman Empire
Donald Trump. Despite many critics voicing their at the end of World War I. The start of the Jewish
concerns since the announcement of the deal, the two immigration to the region after that war, which peaked
leaders have continued to claim that their agreement later during World War II, led to conflicts between the
would only serve to bring about regional peace. Coined Palestinian people and Jews. After failing to cope with
as the "Deal of the Century" by Netanyahu and Trump, the situation on its own, Britain took the issue to the
the so-called Middle East peace plan intends to end the United Nations, and the U.N. Special Committee on
Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Prepared at the behest of Palestine (UNSCOP) was established to bring a solution
President Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, the plan to the problem. The committee conducted investigations
contains a number of controversial details including a in the region and presented two solution proposals to
plan that would prevent Palestine from becoming a the U.N. General Assembly (UNGA). The first proposal,
viable and sovereign state. According to the plan, an known as "minority plan," envisaged a federal state to
undivided Jerusalem will be the capital of Israel. During be composed of Arabs and Jews. The other proposal, or
the last 100 years, Palestinians have experienced the "majority plan," envisaged a two-state solution. This
colonization, exile, military occupation and the ensuing two-state solution was adopted at the UNGA by a
struggle for self-determination. And, on top of that, they majority vote and approved by Resolution 181. The
have faced a troubled quest for coexistence with a nation majority proposal was rejected by Arabs and
which they see as the source of their losses and Palestinians, but Israel declared independence on May
sufferings. On the other hand, for Israel's Jews, the 14, 1948, by adhering to that resolution. Upon that, Arab
return to their ancestral homeland after hundreds of states formed a joint military force and attacked Israel
years of persecution all over the world has not brought but suffered a defeat that is remembered by Palestinians
peace and security. They have been involved in many as Nakba (or "disaster" in English) today. At the end of
wars with their regional neighbors.
63
the war, Israel expanded its territory and large numbers nature within this context is different from the term
of Palestinians were forced to leave their lands. "precedent" in everyday usage. Indeed, the views in
Trump's statement that Israel was already using
What about the law? International legal codes reveal Jerusalem as its capital without facing a serious
that what the Israeli state is doing in Palestinian objection are important in this respect. The violation of
territories is a clear violation of the law. The Jerusalem international law is unacceptable not only for the
crisis alone proves this. It is safe to say that East Palestinian cause but for other similar disputes around
Jerusalem is under occupation in violation of the world. Therefore, the crisis caused by the "Deal of
international law, and this situation was openly the Century" is not a regional or political issue anymore
confirmed by various U.N. resolutions and the practices but a test for international law to pass.
of individual states. While U.N. resolutions underline
the international status of Jerusalem, the resolutions
adopted in recent years mostly put an emphasis on East
Jerusalem. Due to the silence on the issue, the status of
the whole of Jerusalem remains to be determined. Some
states, such as EU members, hold that this situation
does not confer on Israel de jure sovereignty over West
Jerusalem and that the status of international city
envisaged for Jerusalem by the U.N. is still valid. An
analysis of UNGA and U.N. Security Council (UNSC)
resolutions adopted since 1947 paints an interesting
picture. Even in the resolutions it adopted following
Israel's occupation of East Jerusalem in 1967, the UNGA
pointed out that Israel's actions concerning Jerusalem
(without east-west divisions) that could alter the city's
legal status are invalid. Customary International Law is
among the primary sources of international law. The
term "International Precedent" that is of a binding
USA – Afghan deal vs Pak trial in FATF

(Rehman Malik, February 24, 2020, The Nation) The peace talks began in November 2010, when U.S.
The world media is reporting a deal having been diplomats and Taliban representatives met for the first
brokered between USA and Afghanistan — a love-hate time, in Bonn, Germany in an international conference
relationship at the best of times. Afghanistan turned out on Afghanistan. Talks between U.S. and Taliban
to be USA’s darling as they were warmly hosted at the representative continued till the early months of 2012
White House during the Soviet-Afghan war. The Soviet when the USA offered to continue peace talks on one
Union attacked on 25th December 1979 and took over condition, if the Taliban agreed to lay off the weapons
Afghanistan which resulted in the loss of uncountable and agreed to negotiate with the Afghan Government.
lives of innocent Afghanis. The United States decided to As a result of this, the Taliban broke off contact as they
counter Soviets in Afghanistan and so decided to recruit refused to negotiate with Kabul. The “cold war”
Muslim Arabs to launch as Jihadists and took help in continued until 2013 when the Taliban sent a message
doing the same from Pakistan. The US supplied arms, to Washington to reopen peace talks and also agreed to
finance and logistical support as it gave military meet the Afghan Government through intermediaries in
assistance to the mujahedeen against Soviets. Qatar. This also did not appear to be fruitful as U.S. and
The fight between the Mujahedeen started and these Afghan officials refused to address them as
jihadists from abroad started fighting with local Taliban representatives of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan.
and ultimately defeated Russia with the support of In December 2015, the Quadrilateral Coordination
Pakistan and the CIA. When the Soviet Union was Group (QCG), comprising Afghanistan, China, Pakistan
defeated, the United States ditched the mujahedeen by and the U.S was organised to hold peace talks between
leaving abruptly from Afghanistan. These Afro-Arab Afghanistan and the Taliban but it also could not prove
terrorists then revolted against Pakistan and the USA. to be a balanced mechanism to bring lasting peace to
The Afghan Refugees influx arrived in Pakistan after Afghanistan like all other former breakthroughs, as it
this war which marked the beginning of a long period of effectively blocked Russia and Iran from the negotiating
troubles for Pakistan. There is a long history of how table. In December 2016, Russia took the initiative to
Mujahedeen converted into Taliban and later Taliban host talks in Moscow on Afghanistan with both Pakistan
turned into Al-Qaeda. The government of Hikmat Yar and China followed by two further rounds of talks in
could not sustain and after the fall of his government, February and April 2017 including India, Iran, the
the Taliban took over the rule of Afghanistan. The 9/11 Central Asian states, and the Afghan government in
attacks brought the USA back to Afghanistan and since which the US refused to participate because of Russia
then the hide and seek between both the Taliban and the and ultimately it also got failed.
USA continued and this never-ending war has brought
In November 2018, Russia’s foreign ministry again
miseries both to Pakistan and Afghanistan.
confirmed the peace on Afghanistan on November 9,
wherein it invited Afghanistan, the US, Pakistan, Iran,
64
India, the five bordering Central Asian states, and the he took under the ”Bajwa doctrine”. The stable,
Taliban for the talks in Moscow. India was represented consistent and highly diplomatic role of Ambassador
by Amar Sinha, former ambassador to Afghanistan, and Khalil has been great who continued this mission with
TCA Raghavan, former ambassador to Pakistan. In great patience with all the stakeholders to achieve
December 2018 and from June – August 2019 again, despite many ups and downs.
few more rounds of dialogue were held between It will be a great success of President Donald Trump
USA/Afghan Govt officials and Taliban in Abu Dhabi before his general election and this withdrawal factor
and Doha. Though the Afghan officials and the Taliban and deal with the Taliban will create a great positive
never met face-to-face, but the intermediary countries; political impact on his forthcoming campaign and
Saudi Arabia USA and Pakistan conveyed messages on subsequent votebank of his election as the President. It
their behalf. The US officials and a Taliban delegation is to be seen as what will be the covert and overt
discussed a potential prisoner exchange and also the reaction of Iran, India, Russia, China and Saudi Arabia
Trump administration decided to withdraw half of its and other middle Eastern countries. The main
14000 troops from Afghanistan. Zalmay Khalilzad, an leadership of Overseas Afghan Talban is under the
Afghan-US diplomat who served as US ambassador to control of Mr. Sirajuddin Haqani with other Taliban
the United Nations (2007-2009), Iraq (2005-2007) and groups. It is yet to be seen how the old Northern
Afghanistan (2003-2005), represented Washington in Alliance, Tajik faction and factional parties show their
the said talks. reaction to this deal. I understand Pakistan has played a
Since 9/11 the only country that has affected the most great role and I have earlier also enforced this solid
due to terrorism is Pakistan and still is bearing the proposal, to request the USA either to withdraw the
brunt of ongoing insurgency in the region. According to complaint from FATF against Pakistan or use its
some estimates, Pakistan lost more than 70,000 lives influence and get Pakistan cleared. I stand by my earlier
and over 6,000 soldiers in the ongoing war on terror. statements in FATF that Pakistan will remain in the
Along with this, it cost the economy over $120 billion. FATF and half of Pakistan will be convicted on money
The peace process with the support of Pakistan is laundering/terrorist financing until the USA withdraws
inching toward success which is a piece of great news for its complaint. Hence the easy way is to manage through
Pakistan and Afghanistan in particular and for the world skilful diplomatic efforts through high offices of
in general. Nevertheless, this time the USA looks to be Pakistan to link this deal to get out FATF. I had stated
very serious because of the directive of President Donald on 29th November, 2019 and two weeks back on the
Trump. I have a few observations for direct and indirect floor of the house that we must move forward towards
involvement in this process on the basis of these factors USA and not the other 800 participants of the FATF
below: meeting to get out of FATF. Pakistan must take a wise
1. Who will be the Guarantor of the ceasefire? move and link the exit from FATF with USA - Afghan
2.Will Ashraf Ghani step down or will there be a peace deal. We should request USA to withdraw its
national government with the Taliban? complaint from FATF allowing Pakistan to have
3. What would be the impact of serious differences financial freedom and to create faff free investment
between Abdullah and Ashraf Ghani on this deal. environment if the USA wants a favourable outcome of
4. Or — pursuant to above, is it a part of the strategy to peace talks with Pakistan’s help, as there’s no such thing
use the disputed election to accommodate the Taliban in as free lunch in the world. We need to get out of FATF to
a national government whereas there is no provision of block the economic meltdown because of fast sliding
an interim govt in the Afghan constitution? economy.
I would like to extend the highest appreciation to COAS,
Gen Qamer Bajwa, as it is his great success the initiative
Pakistan’s unconditional diplomacy

(Reema Shaukat, February 26, 2020, The Nation) President. Historically he also holds the honour of
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan made a addressing Pakistani Parliament’s joint session every
successful two day visit to Pakistan and following that time he visited. As projected after the Pakistan’s absence
was the visit of UN Secretary General António Guterres. from Kuala Lumpur Summit, this official call negated all
Both the official calls were highly successful and yet kind of apprehensions and negative propaganda against
critical at the same time when Pakistan was struggling Pakistan. Certainly, Pakistan is quite dynamic from the
with the FATF obligations. These much anticipated and kiosk of foreign policy now and hopeful that it will be
awaited visits are considered quite crucial for Pakistan able to restore its desired stature in international
in lieu of emergent economic conditions. Before community and to an extent it has achieved some
evaluating both the visits, it is important to know that milestones too. Before analysing the Turkish President
they speak volume about the Pakistan’s now much visit to Pakistan, it is important to highlight the cordial
active foreign policy which in past was not that much relations both countries share. These relations date back
highlighted on diplomatic desk internationally. Though to 1920s Khilafat Movement to save Ottoman Empire
there is a lot of room for improvement in it but and how one can overlook Turkish honour for our great
nevertheless one should appreciate the fact that it is able leaders. Turkey was the first country which facilitated
to shake many fora’s internationally with Pakistan’s Pakistan to publish its currency after 1947. Few years
voice. Coming to Turkish President visit, this was his back Turkey’s historical city Konya has got Allama Iqbal
fourth trip to Pakistan. Earlier he visited twice as Prime Park built adjacent to Mevlana Rumi’s mausoleum. Not
Minister of Turkey and this was his second time visit as to forget there is an honorary grave of Allama Iqbal at
65
Mevlana Rumi’s Tomb in Konya, Turkey and this park which he remained engaged in different activities
entrance displays his picture and quotes at the entrance including discourse at conferences about climate change,
of “Muhammed Ikqal Parki” depicting how much our Pakistan’s role in UN Peacekeeping missions, hosting
visionary poet is still respected abroad. The depth of Afghan refugees for 40 years and later visiting
love, affection and respect among the Turkish people Kartarpur Corridor and appreciating Pakistan’s
and leadership for Muhammad Iqbal is visible today magnificent example of interfaith dialogue, where he
because of his immense services for Islam and quoted it as ‘the best symbol that we can give for a world
contribution to Turkish causes during the Balkan wars in peace and for a world in which there is mutual respect
and Turkey’s War of Independence. The poetry of our and there is the acceptance of what is different.
national poet Allama Iqbal for them was a vigil in dark Diversity is a blessing, a richness, not a threat”.
to find the way out for freedom. Many parks are on the
Whereas comparing both expeditions which are
name of Iqbal in Turkey and an avenue in Ankara is on
considered as positive omen to those muscles who have
the name of our great Quaid Muhammad Ali Jinnah
often tried to side-line Pakistan towards isolation, they
with the name of Cinnah Caddesi. Apart from historical
should introspect international leaders coming to
relations, it is observed that Pakistan-Turkey relations
Pakistan including visit of Saudi Crown Prince
are not politics bound. Whatever and whenever Pakistan
Muhammad Bin Salman, Malaysia’s Mahathir
required assistance Turkey was on forefront, be it an
Muhammad, Abu Dhabi’s Crown Prince official visit
earthquake or flood relief operations or any kind of
after 12 years, Qatari Emir’s arrival, British Royal Prince
developmental project Turkey’s help remained
William and Kate Middleton social call to Pakistan and
inevitable. This long term strategic partnership
many high profile delegates choosing a country to
comprises of different MoU’s in the line of defence and
strengthen diplomatic ties definitely offers a reminder
economic cooperation, which were refreshed during this
to those who tagged Pakistan with terrorism. Apart from
visit of Turkish President. Pakistan-Turkey also share
chanting diplomatically triumphant Pakistan still needs
three international platforms which are OIC, ECO and
to do necessary homework with regards to following up
D-8 and being economic forte the determinant of
of investments made and work done. Pakistan has
international political system, both countries can help
gained due support for Kashmir issue but policies for
strengthening each other economies by means of trade
resolving the dispute via international organizations like
and investment. In this regard, construction of custom
UN require more vocals. Likewise, Pakistan has
free trade corridor via Central Asia and on bigger
convinced concerned authorities on effective steps taken
landscape CPEC can boost financial prudence. Apart
to avoid FATF black listing, yet the Pakistan’s pivotal
from whatever agreements are made, the most
importance in South Asia is an eye-sore for few of
important step is the following up of such deals. Be it is
international alliances who despite acknowledging
the assistance in education sector, media ventures,
Pakistan’s efforts to eradicate terrorism and facilitating
infrastructure project or defence matters, the primary
due sustenance for Afghan peace process try to find out
task is to follow up from both sides to achieve timely
lacunas and deliberate threats out of it. To achieve more
results. Otherwise the concerned common man will
apart from keeping house in order at domestic front, a
remain ignorant of such boosted visits. Immediately
cautious approach for globe is mandatory too.
after Erdogan visit was UNSG arrival to Pakistan in
Food inflation - what is driving it?

(Dr Kamal Monnoo, February 26, 2020, The Nation) also in surprisingly marking a relatively higher
Well, as mediocrity, conflict-of-interest and cover-up threshold of food insecurity in rural areas than in the
creeps in, with it all the lofty hopes of change, a urban areas – historically the reverse used to be the case:
transparent management structure and efficient urban population instead was considered more
delivery seem like a pipedream. The rhetoric cum vulnerable to food scarcity challenges and essentials
intentions may all be very well, but people need food supply chain disruptions. This in-turn points to two
and employment, and both are getting increasingly deeper rooted problems: First, that small farming in
elusive. Without creating further drama on how difficult Pakistan’s rural areas is collapsing much faster than
things stand today for businesses and public at large, larger farming, since the smaller farmers generally tend
let’s try and analyze what exactly is causing the current to sell a big chunk of their produce closer to home and a
economic impasse: rising unemployment coupled with scarcity situation in rural supplies depicts that the small
un-tame able inflation, especially in food items? farmers have suffered more, and Second, the high
Surprisingly, the answer is quite simple: Flawed policy interest rate largely considered to be a monetary tool (to
framework coupled with rather poor economic curb inflation) in the urban areas is now suddenly also
management. South Asia in general and Pakistan in stoking inflation in the rural areas in a significant way –
particular, have their own peculiar economic limitations Reason: Despite not largely being in the main
and anyone who thinks these can be addressed by formal/banking borrowing framework, the informal or
standard western tools, only ends up exacerbating the the undocumented sector (quite large in rural areas)
situation. Little wonder that the present economic team somehow tends to benchmark the official discount rate
having little domestic work experience and scant local in setting its own non-banking market credit rates and
stakes has fallen prey to this very trap. Food inflation its new inflated profitability targets. By one estimate the
particularly in rural areas touched 25% last month, informal lending/credit rate in the last 9 months has
something that is unprecedented in Pakistan’s economic risen from 2% to nearly 3.50% per month. As the rural
history not only in terms of the inflation percentile, but trickle-supply shrinks and the operational costs mount,
66
coupled with administrative failures to protect the faltered mainly to some controversial and poor human
interests of the small farmer, these developments resource choices is in food’s supply-chain management.
somewhere down the line invariably take the shape of A Management-101 lesson will tell you that as upheaval
shortages and artificial price hikes. However, even more (like the one we are witnessing in shape of the current
importantly, what one needs to understand is that as the interest rate) and uncertainty (on policy framework per
rural economy stutters, so does industrial growth. Over se given the never ending spike in taxes) creeps into
the last few years industrial growth has mainly come revenue drives, businesses invariably respond by
from the new evolving rural consumption (Motorcycles; invoking the preemptive, albeit short-sighted, survival
Beverages; FMCG; Automobiles; Basic household mechanism based on price increases - And this then
appliances like refrigerators, televisions, etc.) and with kicks in a vicious cycle of stubborn inflation fueled
such high inflation almost eroding the entire disposable through supply side pressures. Moreover, it belies any
income of an average rural household the breaks have logic, as to why our traditional buffer-stock levels of
already been applied on all types of growth, e.g. essentials like wheat and sugar were unnecessarily
manufacturing, service, luxury and sadly in investment tampered with, by the economic managers! The
to seek higher & value-added yields. It seems that the importance of Granary management is something that
state here is its own worst enemy. Meaning, the dates back to times even before Christ. The biblical story
monetary tool it is using to supposedly control damage of Joseph in essence revolves around management of
is in fact causing the most damage itself. Not only is it maintaining an ever-normal granary inventory in Egypt,
draining the national exchequer’s own precious fiscal an event, which was sparked by the Pharaoh’s dream
resources – Around 60% of revenue collection is blown where he dreamt of a cycle of 7 months of good crop
away in debt servicing owing to such a high interest rate followed by 7 months of famine. A buffer stock scheme,
(the government itself happens to be the largest as we know, is in effect an attempt to use commodity
borrower), but also an unrealistically high interest rate storage for the purposes of stabilizing food supply chain
cost is rapidly eroding competitiveness, a phenomenon for the masses. The strategy is to either store the
beginning to reflect in once again declining exports and commodity for rainy days or otherwise manage its flow
re-emerging imports! Also, when it comes to cost of in the market in a way that prices remain stable. The
doing business, we seem to be swimming against the scheme also tries to ensure that domestic food (when
tide in the context of South Asian dynamics. Pakistan not surplus) is kept out of the range for other other
over the last 12 months tops the chart amongst South countries to purchase so that there are no shortages at
Asian countries in terms of new or enhanced tax levies home. Even today, China and India take their
and comparative borrowing rates. A cursory look agriculture buffer stocks extremely seriously and mange
around us, and one notices that unlike the SBP, the them very professionally. China (the largest producer of
Reserve Bank of India takes an opposite view. India’s Wheat) for example, anticipating current global Wheat
central bank - its Governor, Shaktikanta Das - thinks movement decided to raise its total Wheat buffer stock
that as a highly populated country supporting a very to 200 million tons from 132 million tons this year.
young population, India simply cannot afford a Likewise, in India (the second largest producer of Wheat
slowdown. So, to aid Indian businesses, Governor Das in the world) the Modi Sarkar recently announced that it
has cut interest rates five times this year to help cushionwould be adding another 30 million tons to the wheat
the economy and pump liquidity into the markets buffer stock, as maintained by the Indian government.
(current RBI discount rate is 5.15%). Bangladesh has In comparison, we took the reverse direction. Our action
followed suit and has a discount rate of 5%. Meanwhile, makes no sense, because if we were indeed only carrying
the Indian government to combat a looming recession a wheat stock of around 28 million tons, then the figure
has announced a slew of helping measures including: in comparison to per capita Chines & Indian stocks does
$20 billion in tax cuts to companies; not seem to be high enough to merit its exports; and
slashing/subsidizing energy and power tariffs for the that too at the cost of compromising national food
companies by nearly 10% while promising that even security? In modern day world, supply chain
more will be considered going forward in 2020; management forms the key to economic success. In fact
consciously forcing the banks to spur lending to the successful businesses these days spend almost more
private sector, especially the SMEs and start-ups; and by than two thirds of their administrative budgets in
announcing India’s biggest ever privatization drive in ensuring supply chain efficiencies to help them achieve
more than 15 years. And again, Bangladesh, also not to sustainable cum profitable financials. So really, it seems
be left behind, has gone even one step further in each of rather callous that here at home in an economy with
these steps (as it has in the case of the discount rate by such a thin line between abject poverty and sustenance
maintaining it lower than the Indian rate) to ensure that (for its population), we take food security and its supply
its economy keeps up the growth momentum at around chain management so lightly!
7.30%. The other area where the government has
Trump, Modi and the Indo-Pacific

Adeela Naureen and Umar Waqar unfortunately the powers against the more democratic
February 26th, 2020- The Nation and multipolar world are trying to hamper the process
Russian federation Foreign minister Sergey Lavrov of a more open and fair world. Our western friends use
delivered a talk at Raisina Dialogue, New Delhi on 15 the language like International Law less and less and
Jan 2020 and shared his views on how Russia views the have coined a new word Rule Based World order, this
shaping of new global order. Lavrov deliberated that may be dangerous as you are imposing upon others, this
67
makes it harder to deal with global issues of in the Indian Ocean. More ironically this so called Indo
transnational nature, like terrorism, water security, foodPacific Alliance is represented by Western dominated
security, organized crime, bringing weapons to outer militaries with one addition of India. Technically, in a
space and even weaponising the cyber space. Talking of more subtle way, France and UK are already poised to
vast continent of Eurasia, Lavrov highlighted that many join the so called Quad, and India may be slipping into
great people are trying to make this region unite and this new trap of Neo Colonialism and working against
competitive. President Putin during discourse on Russia the interest of the region.
ASEAN summit talked on Grand Eurasian Space
Yalda Hakim had probably a guided set of questions on
expanding right upto Indonesia and integrating
China and even asked the UK Naval Chief of Staff on
Eurasian Economic Union, ASEAN and SCO and should
why British were reluctant to not to accommodate
include all countries in grand Eurasian space. Russia
Hwavei of China, it looked quite absurd.UK Naval chief
has also promoted Asia Pacific cooperation. While
boasted about how UK was collaborating with US,
deliberating on the Indo Pacific, Lavrov linked it with
France, Japan and even Canada on rule based
the jargon of Rule Based World Order, propagated by
international order and freedom of navigation in South
the West. When we asked about the difference between
China Sea. As Modi eagerly awaits Trump’s visit to India,
Asia Pacific strategy and Indo Pacific, the answer is that
there is a tectonic shift taking place in Eurasia, the Indo
‘Indo Pacific is more open and more democratic’. It is
Pacific alliance is coming of age. India, confronted with
actually an attempt to reconfigure existing structures in
serious economic problems and collapse of corporate
the Eurasian continent and moving from ASEAN
sectors of banking, telecom and even energy, is
centered structure to something that will be divisive.
desperately seeking for a wind fall from this visit.
When we ask them, does it include East Africa or the
Obama’s dream of Asia pivot which was nurtured
Persian Gulf, they say no! Lavrov also talked about
through Shinzo Abe’s Asia Democratic Security
Russian efforts to initiate dialogue amongst countries
Diamond aka ‘Quad’ has been further given a fillip by
across the Gulf, confidence building measures and more
discourse in Raisina dialogue, regularly held in Delhi.
transparency in collective security matters. We must
The Russian and Chinese position on Indo Pacific has
strive for a 21st Century which does not start a new
been very clear, it’s based on exclusion of important
process of Colonialism or Neo Colonialism; sanctions
countries in the region, goes against the spirit of SCO
are not going to work.
and Eurasia and actually fails to even define the term
While replying to a question from the moderator on Indo Pacific. The honorable Russian foreign Minister
Indo Pacific, Lavrov candidly replied that Indo Pacific Sergey Lavrov conveyed this to Indian and regional
was mainly meant to contain China and was definitely audience in no unequivocal terms that Indo Pacific was
based on exclusion rather than inclusion. Russia would a red herring being sold by the West to create cleavage
prefer formats which will not divide but unite countries between the Eurasian countries. He openly asked the
of the region. Think about the term Rule Based Indian audience and participants of Raisina dialogue
International order vs International law, why such about these questions. How do you define Indo Pacific,
divisive jargons are used? If you play with rules of is it a geographical term, why does it exclude the Gulf
International Law, which is governed by the United region or North Arabian Sea or for that matter East
Nations, you are actually twisting the existing structures. coast of Africa.
These terminologies are not benign but substantive and
Chinese stance is also clear, China regards it as a new
are used to highjack sovereignty of nations and states
great game to create a Rimland around the emerging
through a subtle use. While Lavrov got half an hour to
block of Eurasia and targets Russian and Chinese
give his point of view, Raisina dialogue gave hours to
interests. Indian Media is already raising the
China bashing by including military commanders on
temperature by boasting that Trump’s visit would open
topics like “Fluid Fleets: Navigating Tides of Revision in
new vistas of Security cooperation. As reported by
the Indo-Pacific”. This panel included the Chief of Naval
Times of India, describing the US-India relationship as
Staff on Indian Navy, The Chief of Staff of Japanese
one of the “most consequential” partnerships, Indian
Defence Forces, Vice Chief for Defence Forces of
Foreign Secretary Harsh Vardhan Shingle said “It is a
Australia, the Chief of Naval staff of UK, and Deputy
strategic partnership based on shared values and geared
Director General for International Relations and
towards the 21st century. Whether in countering
Strategy from France. Ironically the first questions
terrorism or in ensuring a peaceful and prosperous
asked by Yalda Hakim, the moderator, was, ‘Number
Indo-Pacific, India and the US have unprecedented
one, two and three concerns for this region was China,
convergence of interests.” While Modi has tried to hide
China and China” Indian Naval chief’s response was that
the Sights and smells of India to please Trump, the visit
India was concerned about unusual activity of Chinese
to India should be watched by the Eurasian brotherhood
Navy in Indian Ocean and the initiatives like Belt and
with care, the defence deals, the issue of regional
road and CPEC impinged upon Indian sovereignty.
security and deliberations on Indo Pacific will crystalize
Indian Naval Chief conveniently forgot that US has an
the new game, unfortunately impinging upon the
Armada of ships almost permanently placed in the
Eurasian spirit.
region and UK and France are having permanent bases
South Asia: What lies within and beyond.

(Naghmana Shahid | January 23, 2020, The Nation) that offers a threshold for a new beginning. Pakistan
being an important member of South Asia stands proud
South Asia has a very important role to play for the
at the helm of the Himalayas, underneath the Greater
future of the planet. It remains the pivot, an opening
68
Himalayas, awaiting to play its role to completely of Assam which declared 1.9 million people as “illegal”
transform the region. Pakistan has so much to migrants. It is speculated that the NRC will be enforced
contribute and prove its existence beneficial for the nationwide against anyone who doesn’t have the
South Asian populace, which might have a long-lasting documents to prove that their ancestors lived in India,
impact for humanity. For that to be initiated, Pakistan’s and States across the country have been asked to
relations with the neighbourhood need to be bolstered. prepare detention centres to house these “illegals”. The
In an ideal scenario, both China and India should join law is controversial because it provides protection to
hands with Pakistan to make ours the most prosperous Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, Parsis and Christians,
region in the world. The One Belt One Road can be so but renders only Muslims stateless, who can face
much more than what it is, and aims to be. Given the deportation or indefinite period of internment. In
ground realities right now, Pakistan should begin this addition, India is also planning to conduct a National
journey by looking to increase its exports to China. That Population Registration survey from 1st April to 30th
is one aspect that will improve the state’s economy, by September that will make it easier to create the NRC,
addressing the trade balance with our ‘all-weather apart from the national census scheduled to be held next
friend’. Among the lesser explored trade routes is the year. Ever-since coming into power, the
pathway that leads to Iran. Pakistan can benefit so much hyper-nationalist regime of Narendra Modi has been
by increasing its exports to Iran, which came to our working towards a systematic extermination of Muslims
rescue by exporting tomatoes amidst the recent crisis. from ‘Hindu’ India. Whether it is the state-sponsored
The sanctions are a stumbling block, but if trade pacts cow vigilantism or mob lynching, the fascist Indian
with Iran can be formulated, both countries are set to government is rendering Muslim citizens stateless
benefit and address their respective economic crises. under the garb of the NRC, terming them as
“termites” and “foreign infiltrators” as stated by Home
Of course in both the above mentioned cases, and pretty
Minister Amit Shah. In fact, the recent steps such as
much most developments in the region, Gwadar carries
revocation of Article 370 of the Muslim-majority state of
immense significance. The city is going to become the
Jammu and Kashmir, and plans to build a Hindu temple
industrial hub for Pakistan and we might as well make
at the site of the Babri Masjid, which was demolished in
the most of it by encouraging others to add their bits so
1992 by a mob of Hindu nationalists, are all in line with
that South Asia can collectively prosper. While internet
RSS-led BJP’s commitment to build a “Hindu” nation.
knows no bounds – regional or otherwise – a collective
Currently, new detention camps along the lines of Nazi
South Asian uplift can also be facilitated through an
camps are being set up across India. In July last year,
e-commerce revolution. An increasing number of
Nityanand Rai, Minister of State for Home Affairs,
Pakistanis, from a growing array of areas, are becoming
stated that all the states had been asked to establish
versed in the internet, and hence business models are
detention centres in accordance with the Model
taking the online route for development. Even old
Detention Centre Manual prepared by the government.
women from rural areas are now running businesses
The tactics adopted by the Nazi regime and today’s
online. The overlapping regional interests can be taken
RSS-led BJP leadership in New Delhi are eerily familiar.
to the next level through the internet. Just imagine a
Dehumanizing a large section of a minority community
collective market in South Asia , like the European
of Muslims, disseminating black propaganda through
Union and how that can lift the poor from all the nations
mass and social media, inciting communal violence, and
in the region. The employment opportunities would soar,
increasing tensions at the border to promote Hindutva
significantly improving the unemployment figures in
for enlisting public support and win elections have been
South Asia . Let us take that initiative and begin
some of the tactics of the Indian government since
undoing the wrongs of our past, throwing the gauntlet to
assuming power in 2014. So much so that recently, a
our neighbours to reciprocate and work for the
German student was deported from the country after he
collective good. Unity has so much positive to offer to
participated in the anti-CAA protests as he was carrying
everyone. The march should be forward and not
a placard referring to the events which took place in his
backward.
homeland stating “1933-1945. We have been there.”
Declaring Muslims as “illegals” in their own country will
(Seher Kamran | January 11, 2020, The Nation)
only lead to creation of a refugee crisis, in this already
“The difference between patriotism and nationalism is
troubled region. This humanitarian crisis will result in
that the patriot is proud of his country for what it does,
anarchy and chaos, which can even be used by non-state
and the nationalist is proud of his country no matter
actors to spread their own agenda, and plunge the entire
what it does; the first attitude creates a feeling of
region into new conflicts, and can even provoke threats
responsibility, but the second a feeling of blind
of a nuclear war.
arrogance that leads to war.” –Sydney J. Harris
As a result of these government measures, there have
Last month (December 2019), the Indian Parliament been widespread protests in the country which have
passed a controversial Citizen Amendment Act (CAA), been clamped down by the regime using brute force and
dubbed as the “anti-Muslim law” as it grants citizenship communication blockade. Internet has been shut down
to “persecuted” minorities – except Muslims - who have in various parts of India more than it has been done
flown from neighbouring countries including Pakistan, anywhere in the world. Even after over five months,
Bangladesh and Afghanistan to India. This move hasn’t internet remains largely suspended across the Kashmir
taken place in isolation and is hardly a surprise. In fact, valley. On 31st December, broadband services were
it comes at the heels of publication of the National partially restored for government-run hospitals and
Register of Citizens (NRC) list in the Northeastern state SMS facilities on all mobile phones were reestablished.
69
These authoritative measures by the current regime only Muslims the children of a lesser God? Are Muslims’
expose the façade of its claim of being the biggest rights not human rights? Why Muslims are being
secular democracy. The racism, bigotry and ignorance persecuted globally? Why Muslims’ blood is considered
demonstrated by the government are indeed astounding. cheaper than water? Is being Muslim one’s biggest
What is dangerous is the relative silence of the world crime? The responsibility lies upon the international
community regarding Indian racism and fascism. community, especially the UN, which was created while
Organization of the Islamic Cooperation is the only the world still reeled from the after-effects of the
international forum that has “expressed its concern over holocaust and the systematic dehumanization of a
the recent developments pertaining to both the issue of religious group. History is once again repeating itself,
citizenship rights and the Babri Masjid case.” Though now in India. It needs to be seen whether the world
the United States Commission on International community is able to stop an impending humanitarian
Religious Freedom raised its concerns over the disaster in the form of a refugee crisis, which will
proposed legislation even before it was endorsed by the negatively impact millions of lives, and wreak havoc on
Rajya Sabha, but nothing more or substantial has been the peace and security of the region, or it will continue
done. Similarly, the European Union has so far to act as mute spectator until it is too late.
maintained silence on this impending humanitarian
crisis. The silence of the United Nations and other
humanitarian organizations raises questions: Are
Pakistan’s impressive refugee (Atle Hetland, February 20, 2020 The Nation)
Pakistan has an impressive history as hosting country his mother’s family had come from India as refugees at
for Afghan refugees since the 1970s, mainly after the the time of the partitioning in 1947. He said that there
Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan on New Year’s Eve in are also positive aspects to being a host country for
1979, justified by a friendship treaty of 1978 between the refugees and many Afghans have contributed to the host
countries, and USSR feared that Afghanistan might country’s development. Yet, Pakistan is a poor country
change loyalty to the West. Further conflicts followed in itself and is facing many difficulties, not least as for
Afghanistan after the USSR withdrawal in 1989, indeed unemployment. He said the last twenty years must have
during the Taliban rule 1996-2001. Pakistan continued been the most difficult in Pakistan’s history, also
to open its doors to Afghan refugees. Over the years, because of terrorism. But he underlined that if
more than seven million Afghans have come to Pakistan, foreigners just look at the negative issues in a country,
and more than four million have returned. Today, there they don’t see reality. He recalled that when he first
are 1.4 million registered refuges in Pakistan, and an came to UK, there was a small but visible group of
estimated 2.5-3 million Afghans in Pakistan in total. young men being against foreigners, the ‘skin heads’.
Iran has also hosted huge numbers of Afghan refugees, But UK, one of the most liberal countries in the world,
and it still does, with little support and recognition from could not be judged by the presence of a few ‘skin
the international community. This week, Pakistan, heads’.
Afghanistan and the United Nations have been taking
The PM spent time talking about the Kashmir issue and
stock of the 40-year protracted refugee history at the
he wanted the UN to do more; the UN Secretary General
‘Refugee Summit Islamabad’, also looking ahead for a
himself stressed the urgency for finding a peaceful
‘New Partnership for Solidarity’. The main event was the
solution, and he presented a mediation offer. Yet, India
‘Refugee Summit Islamabad’, but many side-line
has to participate to reach any results. The Kashmir
meetings were attended by the topmost leaders of the
conflict cannot be solved fully by the UN, even if both of
United Nations, including the UN Secretary General
the two countries agreed to come to the negotiating
Antonio Guterres who was earlier UN High
table, under UN mediation. Unfortunately, the UN rules
Commissioner for Refugees, with many visits to
are such that it cannot solve countries’ conflicts; it can
Pakistan. He praised Pakistan and its people for
help, but only the concerned countries can solve them.
generously hosting many millions Afghan refugees. The
There is need for more trust-creation and cooperation
‘Refugee Summit Islamabad’ was held at a time when
between India and Pakistan. If that can be achieved, the
there are prospects for a peace agreement between the
Kashmir situation will be improved and ultimately
Afghan government and the Taliban, as well as a
solved. I mentioned this in my column last week, too.
reduction of foreign troops in the country, after 20 war
However, I do hope that the UN Secretary General can
years. Sadly, an American-Western military presence in
urgently help improve the terrible human rights
Afghanistan remains part of the problem and, maybe,
situation in IOK, worsened again after the Indian
also the solution. Pakistan does what it can to facilitate
annexation in August last year. People need to live in
the peace process, and the top speakers underlined the
dignity, not in humiliation, and the Kashmiri people
importance of getting things right this time; UN
have a right to self-determination. The grave situation is
Secretary General Guterres said that “no Afghan will
politically and morally unacceptable. PM Imran Khan
forgive us if this opportunity is not seized”. PM Imran
drew attention to the dangers in the ultranationalist
Khan promised that Pakistan will continue to do its
Hindutva ideology of the current rulers in India, where
utmost. The ‘Refugee Summit Islamabad’ did indeed
ethnic and religious factors make some people outcasts.
have prominent speakers and panellists, among them
The Muslim minority is two hundre million in a country
Pakistan’s Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi
with much over a billion people. He said that we have
and Dr. Sania Nishtar. Prime Minister Imran Khan’s
seen what extreme thinking can lead to, comparing with
speech was moving and impressive. He mentioned that
70
Nazism. If the situation gets far worse, it could have Pakistan, from 1980-2005, under the title ‘Learning
enormous destructive effects on the country and region, Away from Home’. Now, it is time to continue that work,
with unprecedented numbers of refugees coming to and to write about other fields. It puzzles me that so
Pakistan. In the refugee field there is very little research,
little research has been done. The proud history must be
in spite of its 40-year history affecting many million documented and that could be one concrete follow-up
people and major expenses from the host country’s after the ‘Refugee Summit Islamabad’ this week. With
government and individuals, UNHCR, other UN more than 70 million refugees in the world, living poor
agencies, bilateral agencies, and NGOs. All
lives, we must give the field much more research focus,
organizations prepare a lot of reports about their own and indeed funding. Finally, the ‘World Day of Social
work, including monitoring and evaluation reports, not Justice’ is with the 2020 theme being ‘closing the
all actors and the epoch. The reports are invaluable for inequalities gap’. Much of the worst social, economic,
research, but are not research as such. It is essential thatgender and other inequalities in the world are in conflict
Pakistan documents and carries out research about its and post-conflict situations, affecting refugees and other
refugee history, to learn from it at home and teach migrants.
others. In 2006-2007, after I had worked for UNHCR
and UNESCO for several years as a refugee education
specialist in Pakistan, I wrote three research-based
books about the Afghan refugee education history in
FTO - a symbol of good governance

(Muhammad Ashraf, February 21, 2020 The Nation) instead of resorting to lengthy correspondence with the
The concept of the ombudsman evolved during the tax authorities and repeated appearances, personally
Swedish enlightenment in eighteenth century where discussed the issue with the high ups of the Income Tax
democracy, humanitarianism and individual liberty Department. That actually is my motivation to
were emphasized against state absolutism, injustice and contribute this piece of writing. As a journalist and a
abuse or misuse of public power. The surge of columnist I felt it obligatory to contribute my bit to the
democratic values placed prime importance upon the creation of awareness among the people on an issue of
personal responsibility of officials towards their citizens. public interest. According to the annual report of FTO
According to Sir, John Robertson the Ombudsman the institution settled 2713 complaints during the year
institution is seen as a valuable insurance against falling 2019 and the average period of complaint disposal was
back into old habits, and an influential oversight 45.3 days which by any standards is a commendable
organization to ensure that the bureaucracy has a more effort in line with the concept of expeditious and cost
humane approach. The concept is now widely accepted free justice. The FTO not only acts on the complaints
and practiced in all the democratic and welfare states. formally filed by the complainant but also takes suo
The justification for setting up this institution also moto notice of any maladministration by the tax
stemmed from the realization that with more and more authorities. The complaint can be filed personally,
delegation of powers to the state institutions and through courier service, email, online and fax. The cases
administrative wings of the government, the oversight with which FTO deals under the purview of
by the parliament and judiciary on the abuse of power maladministration include: a decision of the tax
by the state functionaries was not enough and there was authorities contrary to law, rules or regulations or in
a need for an arrangement outside the judicial review contravention of an established practice or procedure; a
which addresses public complaints through an decision based on irrelevant grounds involving, failure
expeditious and cost free process.With the passage of or refusal for corrupt or improper motives such as
time it was also realized that with the expansion in the bribery, jobbery, favouritism, nepotism and
administrative structures of the government and administrative excesses; neglect, inattention, delay ,
introduction of culture of specialization one incompetence of the tax administration in the discharge
Ombudsman at the national level was not enough and of duties and responsibilities; serving of repeated
there was an imperative need to have separate notices or prolonged hearings involving assessment of
Ombudsman for the most important sectors within the income or wealth, determination of liability of tax or
administrative structure. Pakistan established the duty, classification or valuation of goods, settlement of
institution of Federal Ombudsman in 1983. Since claims of refund, rebate or duty drawback or
Revenue sector of the economy was the most important determination of fiscal and tax concession of
contributor to the economy and the people often exemptions; willful errors in the determination of
complained about the abuse of power by the tax refunds, rebates or duty drawbacks, deliberate
collecting officials, the government set up the institution withholding or non-payment of refunds, rebates or duty
of Federal Tax Ombudsman in 2000. How useful and drawbacks already determined by the competent
effective this institution is in addressing the complaints authority; coercive methods of tax recovery in cases
of the tax-paying individuals and firms affected by the where default in payment of tax or duty is not apparent
maladministration of the tax collecting functionaries from record etc. The complainants can file their
actually dawned on me when I had a personal complaints on the above issues provided the matter is
experience in this regard. I had approached the FTO in not sub judice. It is pertinent to point out that FTO not
regards to inordinate delay in the tax refund by the only deals with complaints in regards to
concerned authorities. Amazingly the problem was maladministration but also identifies areas requiring
settled within two weeks as the tax advisor in FTO attention of FBR and sends its recommendations to
71
remove systemic shortcomings and improving potential tax payers besides the people already in the
governance. The FTO as part of its awareness campaign tax-net also need to be made aware of the available
has run media campaigns from time to time avenues to get their grievances against
supplemented by creation of social media content maladministration of the revenue authorities settled.
besides publishing quarterly newsletter which is sent to Unfortunately our media is excessively focusing on the
government offices, trade bodies, chamber of commerce never-ending political wrangling and in the words of
and industry and tax bar associations. E mails and SMS Prime Minister Imran Khan on whipping up a
messages are also sent to the tax payers. Frequent well-orchestrated propaganda against the government.
interaction with representatives of Chambers of My considered view is that while the media as a
Commerce and Industry and Business and Trade watch-dog against the government, public institutions
organizations and other stakeholders is also a regular and public servants has the responsibility to pinpoint
activity of the FTO. However my personal feeling is that their inadequacies, shortcomings and
the public profile of FTO is not as enviable as it should maladministration, it also has the obligation to project
be due to the sterling contribution it is making in and highlight the positive things done in the public
addressing the complaints of the tax payers. Majority of interest. FTO in its present role is a symbol of good
people do not have an ink-link of what it really does. governance, the hall mark of which is paying attention
Our media which represent the society and is expected to the difficulties and problems of the people and
to uphold its pluralist credentials needs to pay attention resolving them without too much hassle. It needs
to the institutions of the state which are working to greater media attention.
promote the public interest. The general public and the
Toying with nuclear stability

(Samson Simon, February 15, 2020, The Nation) Indian critics, “Indian operational doctrines are not
“We beheld in the sky what appeared to us to be a mass nested in a realistic political context.” Each service is at
of scarlet cloud resembling the fierce flames of a blazing its own while civilian control nukes. Though India’s ad
fire. From that mass many blazing missiles flashed, and hoc force structure argues in favour of oversized armed
tremendous roars, like the noise of a thousand drums forces (sustenance rationale), Pakistan and not China is
beaten at once. And from it fell many weapons winged where they can be deployed. India does not have the
with gold and thousands of thunderbolts, with loud capacity and freedom to push these forces en masse into
explosions, and many hundreds of fiery wheel.” Pakistan. Hence an incremental push into Pakistan with
-- Vaimānika Śāstra terms such as ‘surgical strikes’ and ‘cold start’ etc.
Consequently, India not only becomes vulnerable to
Challenges to Nuclear Deterrence in South Asia are far tactical strikes by Pakistan but also exposes its
more real and imminent than the theoretical Cold War. concentrated strategic forces in depth to Pakistan. The
There is no standoff, no early warning, no détente and rational of logic is missed out. To overcome this
plenty of Vedic Ritualism. The hostilities are real, dilemma, India is investing heavily in its electronic
eyeball to eyeball and along a live line of control. capability, air force, navy and missile defence. The
Religious nationalism provides cause for toying with strategic logic is that air and naval preponderance will
nuclear weapons as a claim to ‘Paradise Lost’. Indian prevent a stalemate on ground by crippling and
military and nuclear strategy perceives a two front war quarantining Pakistan. Theoretically, a limited
much like Erich Friedrich Wilhelm Ludendorff executed conventional conflict would result in defeat under a
in Germany or Israel in 1973 against Egypt and Syria. In massive Indian nuclear shadow and favourable
essence, Ludendorff’s concept of a ‘total war of international environment. This is a lopsided concept as
annihilation’ impacted Nazi military thinking hence the triggers are in two hands and not one. The term General
wars against Poland, neutral Belgium, Russia and the Jehanghir Karamat used for this myopism is, ‘Alice in
Allies. This streak is also visible in the Israeli mind-set Wonderland’. Strategic and military planners must
of expansionism. To understand, compare the understand that the biggest obstacles to stability of
boundaries of Israel after the resettlement and what nuclear deterrence in the Cold War were tactical
they are today. India is not far behind. Compare the missiles and missile defence. Eyeball to eyeball situation
boundaries of India in August 1947 to what they are and asymmetry makes nuclear calculus complicated.
today. Complicating still, Saffron Wave is a How India manages to factorise both in war making
reincarnation of Nazi Germany and nukes a tool for capability is an impossibility, whose only logical
greatness. Indian military thinkers have read too much outcome remains the cost of punishment Pakistan could
German and Israeli war history. India is hegemonic, incur. So what happens to the Indian dissuasive logic of
expansionist and now racist and fascist. In quest for the ‘cost of punishment’ to Pakistan?
reclaiming the Vedic glory, Indian military rhetoric
Military and nuclear planning must have points of
ignores the dangers it poses to nuclear stability. India
convergence and complementary overlap. This is
demonstrated this steak in 2019.
absolutely necessary for graduated escalation control. In
The Army Chiefs consistently maintain that an outbreak Indian strategic thinking, there is an obvious disconnect.
of war could occur in case ‘salami slicing of India Is nuclear preponderance the only option left for war
continues by China’ and proxy wars of Pakistan. This is avoidance? This puts the Indian armed forces in an
where the glaring disconnects about Indian military and impractical war fighting mode. Yet Indian deployments,
nuclear thought begins to take shape. According to training and war games indicate a shift from a
72
space-oriented to a destruction-oriented strategy under then conducted an exit loop violating Pakistan’s airspace
a nuclear shadow It would be more logical to settle the and hastily dropping their payload in a forest. Pakistan
Kashmir issue and make peace with Pakistan. Force retaliated shattering the myth of Indian surveillance and
reductions, arms limitations and nuclear détente would electronic warfare. The Indian military chief was
follow. The people of Great South Asia would benefit. deliberately spared his life. Two Indian aircrafts were
But Indians think otherwise. As long as there is Pakistan, shot while in a state of confusion, Indian missile defence
there is no Akhand Bharat or Bharat Versha. This is how shot down its own chopper. But the pursuit for Vedic
the Saffron Wave views the hostilities and hence a two glory continued. On 27/28 February, India locked six
front conflict under a superior nuclear shadow. Is this sites in Pakistan with surface to surface missiles while
nuclear sabre rattling or something much beyond and its nuclear powered Arihant-class submarine stealthily
catastrophic? Planners in India are in a jigsaw. This crept into Pakistan’s Exclusive Economic Zone. UN
doctrinal disconnect was highlighted by India’s National Security Council members were engaged and told that
Security Secretariat that stated, “If the nuclear shadow Pakistan would respond the moment Indian missiles are
demanded war avoidance as a political outcome, the fired. Pakistan’s would hit Indian targets before Indian
operational sphere attempted to keep alive the notion of missiles hit Pakistan. Modi, the self- incarnated Arjuna
victory despite the risk of mutual annihilation”. Indian of Baghavad Gita blinked or did he? By 4 March 2019,
Ludendorff like Modi fantasise to subdue Pakistan Pakistan Navy detected and localised the Indian nuclear
below a nuclear threshold. To sell the idea, they powered Arihant-class submarine. Had Pakistan wanted,
romanticise with the Vedic idea of a nuclear India the submarine was a sitting duck for engagement. But
spewing fire from skies. Modi the Indian Prime Minster Pakistan exercised restraint to give peace a chance.
flying a massive Vimana with thousands of airborne
Just imagine the nuclear contamination in the Arabian
chariots makes believe that he is the reincarnation of
Sea had Pakistan destroyed this submarine. Was it
Arjuna in Baghavad Gita. In essence this means massive
carrying nuclear weapons is a blunder India must
pre-emptive nuclear strikes against Pakistan? This is
investigate. The incident marked a low point in Indian
exactly what the world witnessed in February 2019. Is
ability at nuclear management and over exposed its
this a realistic political context and does Pakistan’s
nuclear ambivalence. Henceforth, nuclear stability in
defensive nuclear capability deter limited Indian
South Asia is degraded by many disconnects within
offensives? As evident, Pakistan exercised far more
India, toying and resorting to the ultimate nuclear
professionalism and restraint in the sequence of events.
options and Rukhma Vimana. As USA, France and
In February 2019, when India launched its ill-fated
Israel move to augment Indian survivability through
Balakot strikes, it was already in a very high a state of
preponderance, they must realise that they are
nuclear deployment. The triad of Indian nuclear systems
endangering the future of mankind. As for Pakistan, the
was is a high state of readiness. Launch pads already
only option left to maintain balance of terror is to
had Pakistan’s vulnerable points in crosshairs. A flight
increase the cost of punishment manifold. This means
of Mirage 2000 supported by Israeli AWACS, jammers,
developing multiple independently targetable re-entry
drones and interceptors were challenged by Pakistan Air
vehicles, hypersonic cruise missiles and much more. The
Force. The incursion was supported by diversions in
nuclear arms race is on.
Punjab and Sindh. The armada of RUKMA VIMANA
Pakistan’s Foreign Policy Formation

(Atle Hetland, February 13, 2020, The Nation) independence, there were two superpowers, USA and
Besserwissers, the know-it-all locals and foreigners, USSR. Pakistan was from the outset Western-oriented,
sometimes ask; what went wrong and when, in but it also had contact with the then Soviet-Union, the
Pakistan’s foreign policies – and in domestic policies for Central Asia republics, and other countries in the region,
that matter? But then before asking such questions, one Muslim or otherwise. Due to geography, history and
should explain what it is that has gone wrong, and what other reasons, Afghanistan will always remain a
alternatives that existed when decisions were made. I particularly close neighbour. China has become more
believe that Pakistan has done the best out of it all in the important. Iran, too, remains a close neighbour, and
main sectors and broader policies in foreign affairs; in there is also cooperation with the Arab World. In his
domestic policies, choices have been more and other comments on Saudi-Arabia, Ambassador Qazi said that
decisions could have been made, indeed in education at the seminar that it is supported by its close Western
and the other social sectors. In most foreign policy cooperation, even with Israel (against Iran), and that its
sectors, what decisions to take have been given, based future situation as a leading power depends on how well
on historical direction and orientation of the country. In it will be able to solve its domestic politics and change.
Pakistan’s case, much of the course was laid at Since I am a Norwegian, I often make (unequal)
independence in 1947, and even before. In recent comparisons with and draw lessons from my home
decades, better economic development would have country. For example, after WWII, Norway became an
given more choices. I believe that in overall policies, few essential member of the United Nations, with its first
countries can easily change the ship’s course; a country Secretary General being the Norwegian Trygve Lie.
continues what is given in accordance with the country’s Norway was a founding member of NATO in 1949,
history and its relationship with its neighbours, region, whisked into the Western defence alliance without much
super- and major powers, and the wider world, in trade, public debate, probably by American order. From that
culture, religion, and other fields. At Pakistan’s time, the Norwegian foreign policy course has not been
73
changed much, although it allows opposition and debate. Modi’s regime, then as soon as he is gone)? I hope PM
In North-South issues, the soft-spoken Norwegians Imran Khan will be able to begin tentative talks, as he
usually support the developing countries in their has spoken about. More trust between the two countries,
struggle for greater equality and fairer trade, and they more trade and cooperation, is needed for the Kashmir
support the Kashmiri and Palestinian people. As for issue to reach some kind solution. Is it a dream? Maybe,
NATO, it is out of question to allow Norway to leave. but I want to keep the dream – until it comes true, as it
However, I believe the Norwegians only reluctantly will! The most important issue in foreign affairs now is
support the illogical increase in NATO’s budgets, climate change. Pakistan is at the foot of the Himalayas,
spending ten times as much as Russia. where there will be major climate changes that will
affect all life in the sub-continent. In Norway, too, one of
Pakistan’s relations with India, and certainly its policies
the ten largest oil-exporters in the world, situated on the
on Kashmir, have remained unchanged and it seems,
way to the North Pole, many climate change issues must
unchangeable, since 1947, yes, in similar ways as the
be debated, but they are not quite as urgent at the issues
Norwegians, too, are locked in their opinions in those
in Pakistan. Foreign affairs issues of the kind I have
fields I mentioned above. A former Norwegian PM, Kjell
mentioned must be discussed by all in democratic states,
Magne Bondevik, who visited IOK just a while before
not just by staff in foreign affairs ministries. Besides,
India annexed it last autumn, said last week that he
foreign affairs issues are also domestic issues. For
wanted Kashmir higher on the political agenda. He
example, the American foreign policies would have been
being a theologian by training, I am sure a major reason
quite different and better for all of us if people had a
was the terrible human rights situation on the Indian
democratic say. In Scandinavia, we are proud of having
side. None of us do enough and the right things to
the Swedish Greta Thunberg reminding us and the rest
change the Kashmir situation for the better. It is not
of the world that there is no time to slumber any longer.
realistic to expect any outcome of the seven-decade old
Malala Yousafzai is another role model. But shouldn’t it
UN resolutions because they cannot be forced
first of all be the politicians in the political parties who
implemented by anyone, sadly. We must look for other,
put issues on the agenda? It is a shortcoming if it takes
new ways. Also, the three wars between Pakistan and
17-year old teenagers, albeit very smart, to sound the
India were unfortunate, to say the least (as I would,
alarm. In other political fields, domestic and foreign,
being a pacifist). The military must proactively work for
maybe young people will more and more help us change
peaceful resolutions of conflicts. Can we not begin
course and do new things, not just drift along.
serious efforts to create more trust and cooperation
between the two countries (if not under PM Narendra
Child Abuse and deterrent punishment

(Dr Usman Hameed February 10, 2020, The Nation) of the Child 1989 which obliges it to take effective
On 7 February 2020, the national assembly of Pakistan measures to protect children against any kind of abuse.
passed a resolution calling for public hanging of child What steps have we taken so far to fulfil this duty? As to
molesters. While the resolution was non-binding, meant the claim of the lack of empirical evidence, one can reply
for further debate and discussion only, it was met with that neither is there any empirical evidence to indicate
sharp criticism. Those opposing the resolution included public hanging would not be a deterrent to the crime.
some members of the ruling party itself led by its federal Another way to interpret the non-binding resolution can
Minister for human rights. Another federal Minister be that the people of Pakistan have been outraged by a
took to twitter asserting ‘this is just another grave act in rising tide of child molestation and have come to a
line with brutal civilisation practices, societies act in a shared understanding, through their chosen
balanced way barbarianism is not an answer to representatives that further debate and discussion
crimes...... this is another expression of extremism’. Raja should take place to recommend appropriate measures
Pervaiz Ashraf, a national assembly member of PPP, to curb this ghastly crime. In response to the uproar
stated, ‘we cannot put public hanging into practice. It against the resolution, suffice is to say that every
violates the laws of the United Nations’. Likewise, country has its own social needs and indigenous
condemnation also came from human rights bodies, circumstances which have to be kept in view while
particularly Amnesty international that rarely let go of deciding what kind of punishment would be best suited
any opportunity to remind Pakistan of its international to discourage a particular kind of criminality. Thus, for
obligation to abolish the death penalty under an example, internal laws of at least three US states, of
optional protocol of ICCPR 1966. One human rights Louisiana, Texas and Montana provide the death
expert went on to claim that there is no empirical penalty for the crime of child molestation. Similarly,
evidence to show that public hangings are a deterrent to India has enacted ‘The Protection of Children from
crime or in protecting the psychosocial well being of Sexual Offences Act 2012’ giving the death penalty to
children. Admittedly, the issue of the death penalty for child rapists through speedy trial in special courts
child molesters has been contentious, it would be constituted for this purpose. In the same vein, China has
over-simplistic to suggest that public hanging of such a zero-tolerance policy towards child molestation and
persons would make Pakistan a laughing stock in the those who sexually abuse children and cause irreparable
world community and the country would violate its harm are destined to face the death penalty as required
international commitments by doing this. The learned by Chinese law. These countries, while passing their
ministers and rights activists need to be reminded that internal laws, did not pay much heed to international
Pakistan is a signatory to the UN Convention on Rights outcry; by contrast, they considered what punishments
74
would be best fitted to prevent the crime in their local upon and adapted, for instance, public hanging may not
conditions. Everywhere in the world child molestation is always be justifiable but this does not mean the
regarded as a horrendous crime warranting rigorous seriousness of the offence can be denied because of the
measures for its control. This is so because the victim possible backlash of the international community.
being a child is weak and vulnerable, and the trauma
Pakistan’s current legal regime protecting children
he/she experiences while going through abuse stays
against violence, exploitation and sexual abuse is
with him/her forever. Noticeably, there have been
inadequate, to say the least. Formerly, we had laws
instances of people having nightmares even at the age of
against sodomy or murder only, but in 2016 we enacted
60-70 years, of sexual abuse taken place in their
laws criminalising exploitation, abuse, trafficking etc. In
childhood. Thus, states not affording the death penalty
January 2020, the parliament passed Zainab Alert,
at least guarantee stricter punishments to repeat
Response and Recovery Act 2020 which aims to protect
offenders, perpetrators, who victimise multiple children,
and raise an alert when a child goes missing or is
and who stood in a position of trust concerning their
abducted; the Act applies to Islamabad Capital Territory
victims. For example, states of Washington and Kansas
only. The effectiveness of these laws is as yet to be tested.
passed so-called Sexual Predator Laws allowing
On a social level, it is thought to be a taboo in Pakistan
offenders to be committed to mental institutions
to educate your child about sanctity and inviolability of
indefinitely after they have served their prison terms.
his or her body. Use of forensics in criminal
Psychologists believe that ‘paedophilia’ is a result of
investigations is almost non-existent as per the
severe mental disorder and much like alcoholism, it
statement of a former Chief Justice of Pakistan, and
cannot be ensured that the behaviour would not be
reporting of crimes is stigmatised, making it nearly
repeated unless cured by sustained treatment. This
impossible to prove the charge. Under these
mental illness can be treated either by ‘cognitive
circumstances, not having deterrent punishment can
therapy’ or ‘chemical castration’ while cognitive therapy
give a free license to paedophiles and sexual predators
change sex offenders’ understanding of what they do
to implement their sinister designs without fear of
and chemical castration eliminates the psychological
consequences. If anyone has any alternative such as
cause of the urge. If these arrangements are available in
‘cognitive therapy’ or ‘chemical castration’ they are more
your country, then, of course, the alternative
than welcome to take part in the on-going debate.
punishments can be a more appropriate response to the
However, silencing the discussion which reflects the
crime. On the other hand, if your state does not have
consensus of the society to deal sternly with something
these facilities what option you are left with to deal with
so despicable, and that too under the apprehension of
the criminality apart from deterrence. Of course, the
international fury would be nothing short of a tragedy.
modalities of deterrence could be discussed, debated
Afghanistan: Light at the end of tunnel?

(Javid Husain, February 04, 2020 The Nation) supporting the Northern Alliance and Pakistan putting
The Afghanistan peace process is at a critical stage. its weight behind the Taliban who were overwhelmingly
What happens in the next few weeks in the talks Pashtuns. The proxy war and the tussle for the
between the Taliban and the Americans will determine domination of Afghanistan between Pakistan and Iran,
whether the country will once again witness durable who again were guilty of ignoring Afghanistan’s history,
peace and stability or whether it will continue to be the predictably resulted in a failure for both sides with the
scene of continued fighting as it has been since 1979 tragedy of 9/11 and the US invasion of Afghanistan in
when it was invaded by the Soviet forces. However, even October, 2001. It was hoped that the US with the advice
if the Taliban and the Americans are able to reach an of its reputable scholars and think tanks would avoid
agreement, durable peace will be restored in repeating the mistakes of the Soviets, Pakistan and Iran
Afghanistan only if and when the Taliban and the in dealing with Afghanistan but unfortunately the hope
Afghan government also reach a peace settlement remained illusory. The apparently easy victory of the US
through an intra-Afghan dialogue. Obviously the and overthrow of the Taliban government in
dynamics of the two processes, that is, the Afghan-US Afghanistan caused hubris in Washington which made it
talks and the intra-Afghan dialogue are vastly different oblivious of the lessons of the Afghan history leading to
though they are closely interlinked. Also one should not the Afghan quagmire in which it has been bogged down
overlook the hurdles in their way. Therefore, despite for more than 18 years. The US has little to show in
some positive vibes coming from Doha, the success of terms of its achievements in Afghanistan for the longest
the peace process in Afghanistan is far from assured. war in its history and the huge loss of hundreds of
Afghanistan has justifiably been called the graveyard of billions of dollars and the lives of thousands of its
empires. The Soviets disregarded the lessons of history soldiers. The US initially set very ambitious goals for its
to their detriment by invading Afghanistan and military engagement in Afghanistan. President Bush in a
occupying it in 1979. The Soviet military withdrawal in statement in April 2002 declared that the aims of the
February 1989, after the Afghan jihad lasting for about US invasion of Afghanistan were threefold: to defeat and
ten years with the support of the Muslim World and the dismantle Al Qaeda, to impose a government of
West, merely validated the folly of invading Afghanistan. Washington’s choice on the Afghan people in place of
It was with good reason that the British Prime Minister the Taliban government for having provided sanctuary
Harold Macmillan had earlier given the advice that the to Al Qaeda, and to rebuild Afghanistan with a stable
first rule of politics is “Don’t invade Afghanistan.” The government and as “a better place in which to live.”
1990’s was mostly wasted in the internecine fighting Whereas the US was able to defeat Al Qaeda and impose
among the various Afghan armed groups with Iran a government of its choice in Kabul with relative ease,
75
its goals to leave behind a stable Afghan government in that the peace settlement in Afghanistan must enjoy the
conditions of peace and to rebuild Afghanistan as a support of its neighbours especially Pakistan and Iran,
“better place to live” have remained elusive because of besides securing the blessings of major powers
the continuing Taliban insurgency and lack of economic including US, Russia and China. A peace settlement
progress in Afghanistan. The reasons for the American which militates against the vital strategic interests of
failure are not difficult to fathom. The US strategy to either Pakistan or Iran would not be viable in the long
achieve its goals in Afghanistan was found wanting on run. Finally, it goes without saying that both Iran and
several counts. Perhaps the most fundamental error in Pakistan should avoid repeating their mistakes of 1990’s
the US strategy was to place reliance almost exclusively in dealing with Afghanistan. It is now for the Taliban
on its military might to achieve its goals in Afghanistan and the US representatives to work out the modalities
to the neglect of a political approach. It vastly and the timing for the US military withdrawal,
underestimated the tenacity of the Taliban to fight back. commencement of a ceasefire, and the initiation of an
The US invasion of Iraq in 2003 diverted the US intra-Afghan dialogue within the parameters given
attention and military resources elsewhere providing above. Pakistan must continue to extend its full support
the Taliban the room to regroup and pose a serious to the dialogue process. However, one should not
challenge to the American occupation and the political minimize the obstacles in the way of a generally
dispensation propped up by Washington in Afghanistan. acceptable peaceful settlement because of the history of
A related error was to treat the Taliban as terrorists mutual grievances and the mistrust amongst the
rather than a legitimate political group in Afghanistan, interlocutors and the proclivity of the Afghan
with admittedly extremist views, requiring political protagonists to reach for the gun instead of entering into
engagement. It was not until the beginning of 2011 that a dialogue.
the US administration finally recognized, in an address
by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to the Asia Society,
the necessity of a diplomatic route for a peace
settlement in Afghanistan.
The Americans in the formulation of their strategy also
failed to recognize that the tribal and ethnic loyalties
outweighed national loyalties in Afghanistan. If
Washington had taken cognizance of this reality, it
would have realized that a government in Kabul from
which the Pashtuns, constituting about half the
population of Afghanistan, felt alienated would not be
sustainable in the long run. It was a fact that most of the
Taliban were Pashtuns whereas the Kabul government
propped up by the Americans was dominated by
elements of the Northern Alliance consisting of
non-Pashtuns like Tajiks, Hazaras and Uzbeks. The
Taliban resistance to the American occupation of
Afghanistan and to the Kabul government gathered
strength also because of Washington’s attempt to
impose Western liberal values on the extremely
religious and conservative Afghan society. One would
hope that the US, the Taliban, the Afghan government
and other political groups in Afghanistan have drawn
the right conclusions from their past experience. To
begin with, a political settlement is an indispensable
condition for durable peace and stability in Afghanistan.
Secondly, neither the Pashtuns/Taliban nor the
non-Pashtuns alone can establish a stable government
in a peaceful Afghanistan. So the intra-Afghan dialogue,
whenever it starts, will have to evolve a generally
acceptable power sharing formula among the major
ethnic communities and political groups. Thirdly, US is
in no position to impose its views about the formation of
the future Afghan government. It can and should merely
encourage the peace process in Afghanistan by nudging
the Afghan parties and groups towards the negotiating
table. Fourthly, a peace settlement in Afghanistan must
be accompanied by the US military withdrawal from the
country as there would be no justification for the
continued American military presence once a peace
settlement is arrived at and guarantees are given for not
allowing any terrorist groups to operate from the Afghan
territory. Fifthly, the experience of the 1990’s dictates
76
“There comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor
politic, nor popular, but he must take it because his conscience tells him it is right.”
– Martin Luther King Jr.
Martin Luther King’s ‘dream’ for the emancipation of African American’s
launched a new era into the world platform. He worked hard and
diligently for the betterment of his people, resolute and determined to end
the racial bias and segregation that existed in his country on the basis of
color. Where most of us in Pakistan fall short of preventing sectarian
violence and segregation which is often based on ethnic grounds. The
government also fails to create a successful and inclusive number of
policies amongst their people through a more diverse educational
curriculum and cultural shows that promote peace and harmony among
its people. There is a stark polarisation of political affiliations in the world,
where people everywhere have an aggrandised version of nationalist
policies; there are so few of us left to speak for those who wish to adopt a
more moderate approach.
77
Modernising
t h e Muslim World Written by- Shahid Javed Burki (Former caretaker Finance Minister)
followed two very different worldviews that could not

and perhaps would not coexist. Globalisation had
reduced the distance between the two systems not in the
physical sense but in the sense of interaction between
them. The sociologist, Francis Fukuyama, who had
worked with Huntington, came up with a different
hypothesis in his equally celebrated work, The End of
History.
According to him with the demise of European
Communism and the collapse of the Soviet Union,
Western liberal democracy had prevailed. In the former
the individual was supreme, able to pursue his or her
interests within the context of a broadly-defined code of
context. The code in most cases took the form of a
Constitution which was the product not of divine will
but of agreement among the citizens of a particular
entity. Both interpretations of the likely state of world
affairs did not turn out to be entirely correct. In the
post-Cold War situation, there were numerous clashes
around the globe but they were not between civilisations
but between narrow national interests. In so far as
western liberalism was concerned, it too was not fully
developed. This was demonstrated by the way the
impeachment of Donald Trump, America’s 45th
president, unfolded and the way his trial was conducted
in the United States Senate. In a 46page trial
memorandum, the House impeachment managers
asserted that, beginning in the spring of 2019, President
Trump undertook a corrupt campaign to enlist a foreign
government to help him win the 2020 election. He then
The pace and scope of the modernisation of Muslim
attempted to conceal those actions from Congress,
countries matter for the rest of the world. Economic
posing “a serious danger to the constitutional checks
transactions that are conducted without much
and balances”. The American constitutional system had
corruption create citizenry’s confidence in the working
not worked. “President Trump’s conduct is the framers’
of the state. Social interactions that don’t have demands
worst nightmare,” wrote the seven Democratic
from the elites create community cohesion. These are
managers, led by Representative Adam B Schiff of
the broad definitions of modernisation. States that are
California. Where political, social, and economic
at very different levels of modernisation find it difficult
to work with another. The ongoing interaction between modernisation has come to the Muslim world, it has
the United States and Iran is a vivid demonstration of arrived from three different sources. I define the
what a clash between two systems can produce. This Muslim world as the stretch of land from Morocco in
clash is not between two civilisations but between two the West to the southern part of the Philippines in East.
country interests. In this context, we should recall the There are fifty-plus countries in this part of the world
lines of thinking advanced by two American scholars in but there are some that do not have Muslim majorities.
the 1990s — one a political scientist, and the other a India, for instance, has the world’s third largest Muslim
sociologist. Samuel Huntington, the political scientist, population after Indonesia and and Pakistan. Its 170
in his celebrated work, The Clash of Civilizations, million Muslims make up about 15 per cent of the
thought that it was inevitable that the world of Islam country’s 1.3 billion people. By political modernisation I
will clash with the West. These were two cultures that mean structures of governance in
78
which the citizenry participates in defining the way it is modernisation in the Muslim world. Foremost will be
governed. Through rules of conduct, the discretion the need to form an understanding between different
available to those who hold the reins of power is strictly segments of society — between those who rule and those
limited. These rules are generally codified in they govern; between the rich and the poor; and
constitutions. Social modernisation implies that there between the different sects of Islam.
are few obstacles to the movement of people from one
place to another, from one occupation to another, to be
relatively free to participate in community affairs.
Economic modernisation means reasonable equality of
income and wealth, access to education and jobs. The
three sources that have brought some modernisation to
parts of the Muslim world are pressures from bottom to
the top; interest in bringing about change by benevolent
leaders and or elites; or from the traditions left by some
colonial powers. Islam could have been a source as it
was in its early days but in more recent times it has been
interpreted in highly restrictive and conservative ways.
For instance, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia follows Islam
in defining governance as did the Taliban when they
briefly ruled over Afghanistan — from 1996 to 2001.
There are several examples of the three sources of
modernisation. Pakistan, for instance, had learnt
western liberalism from the colonial rule. Over time the
British rulers of colonial India introduced participatory
form of government not at the federal level but in the
provinces. Starting in the early 1930s, they began to
hold elections in the provinces and elected leaders were
inducted into the provincial governments. While a fair
amount of executive authority remained with the
appointed governors, some power devolved to the
elected cabinets. While India built up a sturdy system of
government based on the British system, Pakistan.
wavered. For a total of thirty years, the government in
Pakistan was under the control of military rulers. When
elected rulers were in power, they mostly disregarded
the norms of participatory democracy. It has been since
2008 only when the fourth military leader in the
country’s history was forced out of office that Pakistan
began to move towards a participatory system of
governance. The bottom-to-top system of political
modernisation has mostly failed in the Muslim world. It
was tried by those who staged the Arab Spring in 2011 in
which tens of thousands of disgruntled youths took to
the streets or public squares and demanded changes in
the way they were governed. They scored a number of
immediate successes when some long-serving
authoritarian rulers were forced out of office in Tunisia,
Egypt and Yemen. But it was only in Tunisia that there
was a real change in governance with the emergence of a
democratic order. However, in Egypt the military came
back to power, wielding even greater authority than it
had done under General Hosni Mubarak. His successor
removed the elected President, Mohammad Morsi of the
Muslim Brotherhood, and put him in jail where he died.
The removal of the president in Yemen led to a civil war
which continues to this day while in Syria President
Bashar al-Assad was able to stay in power by a
combination of the use of ruthless force and foreign
help. The Arab Spring continues to surface off and on
and has succeeded in bringing some positive change in
Algeria and Sudan. The bottom-up approach for
bringing about modernisation in the Muslim world has
been generally costly and extremely disruptive. It will
require a great deal of effort to bring about
79

CSS 2021 CA Mag (Vol-I) by Aamir Mahar PDF

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

CSS 2021 CA Mag (Vol-I) by Aamir Mahar PDF

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

wwww.CSSExamPoint.

“It is my dream that we would create a Hindustan of the Hindus. Maharashtrians or

Current Affairs Magazine

How a World Order Ends? by Richard Haass

A New Americanism by Jill Lepore

The Self-Destruction of American Power by Fareed Zakaria

War Is Not Over by Tanisha M. Fazal & Paul Poast

Warnings From Versailles by Margaret MacMillan

What a military intervention in Venezuela would look like? by Frank O. Mora

The Post-INF Treaty Crisis: Background and Next Steps

The crisis of democracy by Tahir Kamran

Pakistan’s changing geopolitics by Dr Naazir Mahmood

How to Revive SAARC by Fateh-ul-Mulk Ali Nasir

The failure of institutions in Pakistan by Rabia Ahmed

Is imperial geopolitics coming back? by Tarik Oguzlu

Global Power dynamics and Pakistan’s foreign policy

Future of transatlantic relations and NATO

International law - The 'Deal of the Century' case

USA – Afghan deal vs Pak trial in FATF

Pakistan’s unconditional diplomacy

Food inflation - what is driving it?

Trump, Modi and the Indo-Pacific

South Asia: What lies within and beyond.

FTO - a symbol of good governance

Toying with nuclear stability

Pakistan’s Foreign Policy Formation

Child Abuse and deterrent punishment

Afghanistan: Light at the end of tunnel?

followed two very different worldviews that could not

S-ar putea să vă placă și