A tinpot despot

When it comes to dealing with nuclear armed enemies threatening its shores, US shows how solicitous, patient it is.

Deranged despots, like Idi Amin of Uganda, François Duvalier aka ‘Papa Doc’ of Haiti, Jean-Bédel Bokassa of the Central African Republic et al, somehow hold the world in their thrall almost like the publicity which the mentally sick celebrities enjoy in tabloids with their outrageous acts. Their weird practices were often the only talk on the diplomatic cocktail circuit some decades ago. Like that of Idi Amin, who ate his guests in the hope of ingesting their virtues and accomplishments; or Papa Doc, who achieved complete mastery over his countrymen by the use of terror and voodoo; or self-crowned ‘Emperor’ Bokassa who dazzled citizens with the glitter and pomp of a coronation done in Napoleonic style and had protesting school children massacred in front of his gates and threatened to eat others if they didn’t fall in line.

However, this obsession continues, judging by the widespread coverage given to the death of yet another eccentric strongman, Kim Jong-il whether in the print or electronic media. In the case of the North Korean leader, it was not only his bizarre habits which attracted perverse interest, but also his possession of nuclear weapons on which he relied increasingly to shore up his moribund regime. Kim Jong-il exploited American fears to the hilt. He let it be known that if pushed to the wall by Washington, he would unleash whatever he had by way of weaponry on the thousands of American servicemen — across the border in South Korea, the thousands more based in Japan and he might even take a potshot at Los Angeles — with his nuclear tipped, long-range missiles. Lest Washington have any doubts, Kim used to periodically fire off a clutch of these missiles to remind Washington that he meant business. While brandishing his growing nuclear capability at the US, he also held South Korea hostage by threatening to devastate Seoul, its mega capital, with his Scud missiles.

When it comes to dealing with enemies with nuclear weapons that can reach their shores, Washington has shown just how solicitous and patient it can be. As for the US Congress, its behaviour, too, has been impeccable. Not a squeak is heard out of them, or at least, none loud enough that would complicate relations with North Korea or give the Kims offence to break off the talks.

In contrast, America’s enemies which do not possess nuclear weapons can expect to be subjected to endless hectoring and receive no mercy. They are bombed, droned and invaded whenever it takes America’s fancy. Of course, the ostensible reasons can vary. The absurd ‘domino’ theory sufficed for Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia; the ‘Monroe Doctrine’ for half a dozen Latin American countries; lies and the spurious and illegal claim of pre-emption accounted for Iraq and the most recent one of ‘saving the population from its leaders and preventing a humanitarian disaster’, was the ploy for Libya. At last count America had, at one time or another, bombed 50 countries since World War II and invaded a dozen on some pretext or another.

Viewed thus, it’s astonishing that revolutionary Iran waited for as long as it did to develop nuclear weapons, considering that Israel has for more than a decade regarded the Iranian mullahs as posing an existential threat to Israel. Actually, it was the Shah who put Iran on the path of developing nuclear weapons capability. He acquired an enrichment plant located in Tehran from, believe it or not, the US, actually General Electric to be precise, in 1968. Ironically, it was Khomeini who scrapped the plant dubbing nuclear weapons as ‘evil’.

Of course, since then Tehran has had second thoughts and who can blame them, considering the fate of Saddam and Qaddafi while, in contrast, Kim Jong-il with a firm grip on power is going to get a hero’s farewell.

US-Pakistan relations, one suspects, has a lot to do with our inability to present even a notional nuclear threat to America as we do not have the means of taking a potshot at the American mainland. India on the other hand, is developing such a capability. That should be food for thought. It may also be the reason why The New York Times is so obsessed with Pakistan’s leaders.

Published in The Express Tribune, December 23^rd, 2011.