Global resentment and public disorientation

Foreign policy of any country is primarily focused on achievement of two goals — furthering a nation’s interest and ensuring national security. But every country has its own geopolitical and geo-economic challenges; and to meet these challenges, the foreign policy of these countries features some constants. Three constants of our foreign policy that have continued since our independence and which have not changed are: our stand on Kashmir; our reliance on the US; and our economy that has continued to rely on aid from abroad.

To all the pessimists, I would refer Germany and Japan as the great examples of renewal, rebuilding and reconstruction. Countries that were devastated from wars became the leading modern welfare states in a timeframe similar to ours in which we as a nation state have hit the rock bottom and earned ourselves such titles as ‘the most dangerous country’, ‘failing state’, etc.

We lacked visionary leadership as ours has been managerial leadership that continued to manage the immediate and never imagined questioning the status quo that resided in our reliance on our foreign policy constants.

We fought four wars with India and after every war we indulged in self-pitying and nationalism. Much like what Germany did after every war that it fought and lost until it lost the WW2. Hitler’s foreign policy constants were to revise the Treaty of Versailles, unite all German speaking people into one Reich and expand eastwards to achieve Lebensraum. Germany had to give up on these foreign policy constants if it was to become part of a new vision of Europe and it needed a leadership that could commit Germany to such a vision. Konrad Adenauer was the German leader who committed himself to such a vision — a vision that transcended the historical division of Europe and considered creation of a European Federation. Konrad assessed that Germany was not strong morally as well as materially to stand alone and any attempt to do so will lead to disaster. He made a clear assessment that Germany will have to give up on many of its previous policies and attitudes. The German political evolution that he brought about enabled him to win four consecutive German elections. For him politics was not the art of the possible but the art of the willed. He rode the people’s popular will and mandate and didn’t allow himself to be overwhelmed by circumstances. His success and Germany’s success under his rule is attributed to his willingness to confront and conflict with German foreign policy constants of that time. His ability to challenge the permanent and constants was drawn from his willingness to accept defeat and the consequences of the defeat. It was through such a demonstrated willingness that he won the faith and confidence of the victors.

Germany came back to life when Gen Eisenhower, the NATO commander at that time, advised President Truman that at the height of spread of communism Europe needed 30 Divisions to defend itself against the spread of communism; and without contribution from German armed forces it was not possible to defend Europe.

Had it not been for Konrad and his willingness to sidestep from German foreign policy constants, the US would never have realised that it was in the US and the world’s interest that Germany should become strong again. Restoring the German dignity and legitimacy required that Konrad showcase a Germany to the world whose legitimacy to participate in an international order was restored by him; and only then would the world consider Germany as a country that could become part of such an order. Konrad successfully achieved two goals — removal of the global resentment about Germany abroad; and the removal of disorientation of his own public at home.

Today, Germany’s economy is the fourth strongest in the world and the strongest in Europe. Would this be possible had the German foreign policy constants not changed? Would this be possible if Konrad had not contributed to the evolution of the German politics and treated it as the art of the willed?

Pakistan is in a grip of political crisis. If anything, it needs a visionary leadership. The managerial leadership of the past and present that has only proliferated the status quo has miserably failed. Our foreign policy constants stand where they were and just a glimpse of change in one of them — reliance on the US — resulted in a regime change in Pakistan. Politics in Pakistan is continued to be treated as the art of the possible and not as an art of the willed. If it was the art of the willed, the first thing that Pakistan should have done was to ask: what do people of Pakistan want? And how do the people answer that question? They answer it by casting their votes to give mandate of rule to the leadership that they want to rule them.

The world questions the legitimacy of our participation in the regional and the international order. If the government is not people’s mandated and not legitimate how can our participation in any order draw the outside world’s legitimacy? The Indian PM has clearly said he wants to talk to Pakistan but he does not know who to talk to. India today is a global economic power. It is part of G-8, G-20, BRICS and ECO. We as a state have our hands outstretched towards the outside world to seek more loans and aid. Our policy on Kashmir has forced us to fight four wars with India and even provoked them to launch proxy war against us from Afghanistan. The handling of our foreign policy constants has only left 225 million people of this country confused, frustrated and disoriented.

All the leading countries of the world have invested in the non-military ways to become modern welfare states. We on the other hand have become a nuclear power but have 25 million children that don’t go to school.

Pakistan needs a visionary leader to lead this country at this critical time. The one who comes closest to demonstrating any vision is being treated like a villain. Those that matter and those that can understand must allow Pakistan to reclaim its dignity and greatness, allow the renewal of its soul and allow the young generation to continue to have unshakable faith in their country and its history. We need a leader who like Konrad can remove the global resentment about Pakistan and who can remove the disorientation of his public at home. I leave it to the readers to decide who toady in Pakistan is the leader who can achieve both these goals.

Published in The Express Tribune, November 21^st, 2022.

Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.