Talking is no problem; neither is bombing
By Lorenzo Gonzalo Read Spanish Version
Apparently, Al Qaeda has been organizing in the tribal areas on Pakistan’s border with Afghanistan. According to reports from U.S. intelligence, this possibility exists. Although we know that the reports given to press can often be manipulated by the government (any metal tube can be described as a deadly weapon), the international news agencies have no doubt that fanatical Islamic followers or supporters of Bin Laden concentrate in that region.
The month of July saw intense activity by Pakistani forces, principally in the area of Islamabad, because of attacks from fanatical groups. The siege of a mosque, where one of the radical leaders of one of those groups was sheltered, ended in a veritable massacre.
Although President Pervez Musharraf has given credible proof that he cooperates with the Bush administration to reduce or eliminate those groups, he has to deal with internal pressures that prevent him from acting against the culture and beliefs that rule the tribal concentrations in that region.
It is important to point out that the current president emerged from the use of force, not from "free elections," as U.S. administrations are accustomed to saying. Nevertheless, as long as the interests defended are those of the U.S. administrations, Musharraf is "a good leader."
And he will continue to be that, as long as he obeys the commands imposed by the U.S. interests in the region.
So far, it hasn’t been necessary to put great pressure on Pakistan. Its harassment of the Taliban’s fanatical forces has been sufficient to keep them in check and wear them down. Pakistan is playing its part in exchange for aid, despite the nuclear danger it represents for the region.
Barak Obama, a candidate for the Democratic nomination for president of the United States, said in Washington on Aug. 1 that if the cooperation of the Pakistani government was not sufficient during his administration, he would send war planes into Pakistan, the country’s sovereignty notwithstanding.
Of course, that enraged the Pakistanis. To many, that statement by Obama may seem inappropriate but it came in answer to an attack from Senator Hillary Clinton, who branded him as naive for having said that he might be willing to talk with Syria, Iran, North Korea and Cuba without preconditions.
Nobody who governs seriously and wants to solve issues involving regional or international policy demands preconditions to sit down and talk, except in the case of a lion and a tethered monkey, or a victor and the vanquished. This doesn’t apply to any of those countries, which have been demonized by the Bush administration and previous governments.
Obama’s statements only made it clear that he understands perfectly the commands of the elite: "Hegemony is not up for discussion and our interests are not negotiable."
However, to say that negotiations are possible without conditions while simultaneously being willing to violate the sovereignty of other territories, even those of second-hand allies (first-hand allies are something else) indicate that the dark-skinned candidate — at least in international policy, the Achilles heel of the current administration — is willing to defend the interests of the establishment: talk, yet be ready to bomb anyone, wherever and whenever necessary.
