Random Posts

'Trump's friendship or bear's bite'

 

'Trump's friendship or bear's bite'



 

India has so far remained silent on Trump’s claim of a ceasefire. While Pakistan has not only confirmed this claim but is apparently happy that Trump is intervening and encouraging amicable resolution of long-standing issues including Kashmir.

India has always been a central element in Pakistan’s foreign policy. Fear of India’s size and territorial dominance forced Pakistan to embrace the US from the very beginning.

But instead of using its influence to find a lasting solution to the bilateral disputes, the US put Pakistan behind the red light of SETU and CENTO in the 1950s. It also armed Pakistan, but on the condition that these weapons would be used only against the communist threat.

The Pakistan-US Defense Cooperation Agreement of 1959 also promised to protect Pakistan from communist countries with none of which Pakistan had any geographical disputes.

On the eve of the India-China war in October-November 1962, some Siyans advised Field Marshal Ayub Khan that this was a golden opportunity to resolve the Kashmir issue by force.

Till then, India was more accustomed to using British weapons than America. Whereas Pakistan was dependent on American weapons and Pakistan also had a one-sided misconception that the 1959 Pakistan-US Defense Agreement was the umbrella under which if Pakistan had provided the Peshawar Air Base to the US for spying on the Soviet Union, the US would not suspend at least defense aid when the time came.

But in the 1965 war, the US stopped the supply of weapons saying that the defense equipment we had provided so far was not for use against India. Thus, the war stopped in 17 days.

It is still a mystery that what Pakistan should have done during the 1962 India-China War was done three years later, on what basis, and what was achieved?

But Pakistan's hope was not broken that America would one day resolve the Kashmir issue. With this hope, in 1970, Yahya Khan also played the role of a mediator in the restoration of Sino-American relations.

How could the Kashmir issue have been resolved? On the contrary, Pakistan was divided into two after about a year. America was so kind that during the war, it symbolically put the Seventh Fleet on display in the Bay of Bengal for a few days and told Indira Gandhi that now that you have taken Dhaka, there is no justification for continuing the war on the West Pakistan front.

Not only was Dhaka lost, but the price of releasing prisoners of war had to be paid in the form of a clause in the Simla Agreement that all fundamental disputes, including the Kashmir issue, would be resolved peacefully without bringing a third party into the mix. That is, the basic resolutions of the United Nations regarding Kashmir, although they remained, lost their importance.

Although these resolutions were passed not on the demand of Pakistan but on the complaint of India.

I remember when President Zulfikar Ali Bhutto landed triumphantly at Lahore airport after signing the Simla Agreement, he threw his jacket from the steps of the plane to the welcoming crowd.

The state narrative was that Bhutto had captivated Indira Gandhi with his extraordinary diplomacy and made her write everything down. 53 years have passed since then. Instead of moving towards resolving the problems, they have taken four steps back.

(The last failed armed attempt was made in Kargil in 1999, and that too when both sides had acquired nuclear weapons. Even then, Pakistan had to approach the United States for a ceasefire.)

But each time, Pakistan’s American subservience increased instead of decreasing. Zia-ul-Haq needed international legitimacy to justify martial law.

The United States needed a proven porter to carry the burden of its anti-Soviet policy in South and West Asia. When the Soviet troops left Afghanistan in full force eight years later, the porter was also dismissed and the task of cleaning up the remnants of the war was left to him.



12, 13 years later, in the war on terror, the US once again persuaded Pakistan to shoulder its burden for the next 20 years. During this time, Pakistan continued to receive a fixed daily wage in exchange for logistical services, while the strategic partnership between India and the US that had always been America's dream began

American investment, civil nuclear cooperation, a regional alliance system to contain China, arms deals, India's investment and diplomatic closeness to the pro-US Gulf countries and the resulting rapid economic growth.

In contrast, Pakistan has only received rollover loans from the IMF and Gulf countries and a little Arab investment in milking institutions.

China has been with Pakistan for the past 65 years. It has, according to the Pakistani establishment, provided a ‘game changer’ like CPEC.

Although China has fully supported Pakistan in the latest conflict, the elite is more happy today to think that Uncle Trump’s promise to resolve the Pakistan-India disputes under his supervision may be fulfilled this time.

Trump, who is fond of mediation, also tried to get between Ukraine and Russia and proposed a solution to the problem that if Ukraine gave 20 percent of its territory to Russia, Ukraine would still have a lot of land.

In exchange for establishing peace, the US would charge only 50 percent of the profits of Ukraine’s mineral wealth as a consultancy fee. Ukraine would have agreed to these terms, but the war is still going on and Vladimir Putin is enjoying a continuous war of nerves with Trump.

So now Trump is also making fun of Putin instead of calling him ‘my friend’. Zelensky has not even achieved peace and whatever he has is also going away.

Trump also offered this solution to the problem of a ceasefire in Gaza: if Gaza is emptied of Palestinians, there will be no more bamboo and no more flute. Israel is fully complying with this wish militarily.

Trump’s pocket is almost bursting with the trillions of dollars of trade promises from the Arabs and other well-wishers of the Palestinians are joining hands.



If Trump is really serious about mediating on the Kashmir issue and suppose India also somehow comes to the table and Trump, after hearing both their cases, decides that either accept the Kashmir that is currently under its control or keep Gilgit-Baltistan as Pakistan because the Silk Road passes through it and give the rest of Kashmir to India or make the entire Kashmir an unarmed autonomous state or give Kashmir to the US on a lease for 25 years and reach some conclusion between them during that time, then tell us.

Will India or Pakistan be able to accept any of these possible formulas. Will they face Trump's wrath in case of rejection? Even knowing that Trump's friendship or enmity is like a bear's paw.

Therefore, the thought of mediation must be happy, but if you are too serious, Trump may lose something or you may lose a lot.

Post a Comment

0 Comments