[lbo-talk] Pakistan

[Jim Devine]

On lbo-talk we recently had a discussion (of sorts) of the US invasion
of Afghanistan, which some see as a good thing (in retrospect). If
there is any good thing that's come out of the War On Terror (WOT?),
I'd say that it was instead with respect to Pakistan. In that case, it
wasn't an invasion, a violation of national self-determination, as
much as a change on the part of the US policy elite.

Before 911, the US stood and watched as Pakistan (especially its
intelligence agency) subsidized  jihadists in Afghanistan and
elsewhere. Pakistan also helped those who wanted to fight India in a
guerrilla war in Kashmir and attacked the Indian parliament. It also
sold nuclear technology to N. Korea, Libya, Iran, and perhaps
elsewhere. These things seem bad for not just the US, but for the
world. The US intelligence services knew about all this but let it
happen, for whatever reason. (In many ways, Pakistan's behavior was an
example of "blowback" from the US war against the USSR in
Afghanistan.)

After 911, the US elite used carrot and stick (aid and blackmail) to
push Pakistan away from these policies. P hasn't moved all the way
(and seems pretty unstable), but it has moved in the right direction.
I think that some, if not all, of the positive results that people
point to as arising from the US invasion of Afghanistan arise from the
US elite's changing strategy vis-a-vis Pakistan.

as usual, if there are any experts in the house, I'm willing to stand
corrected.
--
Jim Devine / "There can be no real individual freedom in the presence
of economic insecurity." -- Chester Bowles