Pakistan: Making of Another Iraq

{At the time the book "If I am assassinated" was written, its author, Late Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, was in jail undergoing trial for the murder of a person who is still as obnoxious and as alive today as the at the time of the trial that ended in his execution. Unable to save him, in penance the people of Pakistan have voted the party he founded "“the PPP- into power now for the third time in 2008. But his party has changed. Instead of being a vehicle for fighting the forces of hegemony, it is now an instrument in the hands of the forces of hegemony "“ regional (India) and global (America). No wonder the PPP is seeking to become a force of internal hegemony under the leadership of Asif Zardari} Usman Khalid in '08 when Pakistan came on track to becoming another Iraq because of the PPP leadership. 

"I entirely agree that the people of Pakistan will not tolerate foreign hegemony. On the basis of the self-same logic, the people of Pakistan would never agree to an internal hegemony. The two hegemonies compliment each other. If our people meekly submit to internal hegemony, a priori, they will have to submit to external hegemony. This is so because the strength and power of external hegemony is far greater than that of internal hegemony. If the people are too terrified to resist the weaker force, it is not possible for them to resist the stronger force. The acceptance of or acquiescence in internal hegemony means submission to external hegemony." - (Z.A.Bhutto in If I am Assassinated)

On September 11, 2006, this writer made the following points in a special 90-minute presentation made on a Hum TV show hosted by Mazhar Abbas, the secretary general of Pakistan Federal Union of Journalists:  War on Terror is a "War for Oil". World's Oil Reserves are over stated. Oil price is likely to hit $100-a-barrel within a few years. War on Terror is a smokescreen.

The concluding remarks of this presentation included the following observation: "Any

leadership perceived to be towing the US policy can not command broad popular support and

will eventually be squeezed between the Americans and the extremists. A vulnerable

government can not undertake the task of national reconciliation and development."

I was surprised by the reaction of some of the top officials in the government as well as many in the media. In short, I was told oil was important but not the central issue. I felt sorry for those people though I was amused given that oil and not terrorism has always been and remains one of the central pillars of the US foreign policy in Middle East. And more recently, energy security has emerged as one of the most important issues of global power politics since the end of Cold War and figures frequently on front pages of leading newspapers in the UK and the US. On September 25, 2006, Professor Jeffrey Sachs (of Columbia University and named among the 100 most influential leaders in the world by Time Magazine in 2004 and 2005) wrote an article in the UK newspaper Guardian, "Fighting the Wrong War" declaring:

" it always comes back to oil. The continuing misguided interventions in the Middle East by the United States and the United Kingdom have their roots deep in the Arabian sand. Ever since Winston Churchill led the conversion of Britain's navy from coal to oil at the start of the last century, the Western powers have meddled incessantly in the affairs of Middle Eastern countries to keep the oil flowing, toppling governments and taking sides in wars in the supposed "great game" of energy resources. But the game is almost over, because the old approaches are obviously failing."

On Nov. 5, 2006, I wrote in the DAWN, "The battle (US quest for global energy control), largely unspoken, is one of the highest stakes battle in World politics of today."

Again on Nov. 25, 2006, I wrote in DAWN, "the centrepiece of Cheney doctrine was oil and Iraq as the first target and Iran the second. Terrorism was to be used only as a pretext for intervention and never to become a priority item on the Bush administration's agenda (even after 9/11)."

On September 16, 2007, former Central Bank head of the United States and an icon of the Republican establishment, Alan Greenspan dropped a bombshell (to use the Times' description) on the White House by writing in his new book that the Iraq War was about oil.

On October 8, 2007, I again wrote an article for DAWN, "Is oil going to hit $100". The article began with a quote from a book, The Age of Fallibility, by George Soros: "All the various components (of the global energy crisis) came together after 9/11, and 9/11 was a major factor in bringing them together. Once we realize this, many other developments fall into place: the war on terror; the invasion of Iraq; the rise of Iran; the radicalization of Islam and the increasing sectarian tensions within Islam; the decline in American power and influence; nuclear proliferation; China's pursuit of natural resources and its negative effect on curing the resource curse; and Russia use of gas supplies to suborn its former empire and the larger danger it poses for Europe. The core of the crisis is the tight supply situation for oil."

On October 31, 2007, speaking at the annual Oil and Money conference in London,

Dr. Sadaf Ibrahim Al-Hussein, former head of oil exploration and development of Saudi Armaco [the largest oil company in the World] rocked the markets by declaring that the world faces

stagnant oil production for the next 15 years and that the world's oil reserves are overstated by 300 billion barrels or 25%.

Oil lies at the center of the "˜War on Terror'. Failure to recognize this or/and its full implications has distracted and muddied our thinking and debates into 'smokescreen' issues like Lal Masjid and Mullah Radio. The real objective of the US is to achieve complete military domination over oil resources and routes. The latest estimate of the US spending on "Oil Wars" is around $1.5 trillion. One has to be completely blind to believe that the US is spending this amount just to fight terrorism or bring democracy to Iraq and Afghanistan. In its pursuit of achieving military primacy, US has devastated Iraq and Afghanistan. Now, Pakistan is in danger of becoming a "˜collateral damage' of the US pursuit of global energy control and military domination if Pakistan Army and establishment continue to fight its so-called War on Terror.

No doubt the Talibans have gained strength in some communities but the type of "˜Haluka Khan' version of religious orthodoxy they practice can never get support from an overwhelming majority of Pakistanis. Militants and extremists exist in many parts of the world and there are many in Pakistan but that is not THIS WAR IS ABOUT. It is about the US quest for global energy control. Even if we, as a nation, decide that we want to be on the US side in this war, $10 billion is "˜peanuts' to fight this war. But now much more than that is at stake. This War has brought Pakistan to the greatest crisis since 1971, a crisis that can result in the disintegration or Balkanization of Pakistan.

As Bill Clinton once famously said, "it is the economy stupid". Would General Musharraf ( despite his limited understanding of the dynamics of global energy security) take notice and rethink his policies? The trouble is he or for that matter, our military and political establishment depend too much on Bush for their survival.

But what about our "˜progressive' democrats and human rights organizations? While they have deserve all our respect and support for working for democracy and human rights, they are

noticeably silent or mute on the US policies in Pakistan and the region. There can be no

democracy and peace in Pakistan if we do not resist the neo-colonial polices of the neo-cons.

The condemnation of the extremism and talk of "˜creeping Talibanisation' by Pakistan's liberal

elite [which enjoys reading the columns of a barely literate person like Ardeshir Cowasjee] must

address some of the root causes that include the fact that the neo-colonialism has destroyed

Afghanistan, enflamed thousands of innocent Pakhtoons and pushed them into the arms of the

extremists.