Double or quits
A soldier can do better than dying on the battlefield in pursuit of paradise — he can send his adversary to hell. That was, at least once, the unofficial American doctrine. Diplomats too occasionally despatch each other to hell; the British traditionally in a manner that makes the adversary look forward to the journey. The subtlety was lost on Pakistan.
Though often persuaded to go to hell, the country keeps turning back from the brink. The British prime minister decided that the time for diplomatic equivocation had passed and this enfant terrible had to be told, in no uncertain terms, that it was playing a “double game”. We were not amused, and can now be blamed for “double standards”. Earlier, we had applauded David Cameron when he fired the first shot from his double-barrel: blaming Israel for turning Gaza into a prison. It was more than a diplomatic gaffe. For him, it could be politically fatal. We should make amends and encourage the young prime minister to carry on catching the bulls by their horns.
It is not that I wish him more trouble with Israel or with his political opponents. I also acknowledge that we may at times be in serious trouble. If you must convey a piece of your real mind about your nemesis, it is better done with a preamble; like “how highly we admire him/her”. And just in case you had no idea about the status of a case in your charge, “it is under our active consideration” would save many a blush.
I still believe we would be better served with some straight talk, Pakistan more than others.
If we were to wish the Taliban in Afghanistan – our best bet to get the region rid of the US-led alliance – all the luck, anyone believing in stating things as they are would be highly impressed. If we added that since many of our troubles began with their arrival, we were now willing to facilitate their departure, some of them would jump at the offer. And just in case we did not have the courage to convey that a number of groups targeting us were sponsored by our so-called allies, we could always leak an odd document to Wikileaks. It would be nice if countries like China, Russia and Iran also expressed their discomfiture with Nato’s meddling with the New Great Game.
The Brits would be delighted. They would dump all the debris of the last decade on the senior partner, hang some of its poodles now under trial (like they used to execute generals and admirals who lost wars in faraway places), and make up with their old friends, the Afghan tribesmen. The Americans could benefit too. They will finally get a chance to get even with the “Big Money” that has run the country to bankruptcy, mortgaged its future to China, and created the most expensive war machine in the world that routinely loses to ragtag warriors in this postmodern warfare. And who knows, India may also concede that the real reason it was dragging its feet on reconciliation with Pakistan was that the price for peace exceeded the cost of the status quo.
On second thought, this conversion to the true faith does not seem like a good idea. It would deprive us of the fun in conducting international relations, of running with the hare and hunting with the hound and letting our emissaries run wild in the pursuit of refining diplomatic doublespeak.
In due course, Mr Cameron too will give up his newfound enthusiasm for calling a spade a spade, at the latest, when a former US defence secretary, William Cohen, reminds him of the lesson he learnt from an illustrious British diplomat, Lord Robertson: “Now that you have joined the circus, learn to ride on two horses.” When the prime minister was admonishing us for looking “both ways”, his Indian hosts should have recalled what their own “showman of the century” taught them about life: “It is a circus, in which one must move and look in all directions.” Double-crossers!
Published in The Express Tribune, August 7th, 2010.
Though often persuaded to go to hell, the country keeps turning back from the brink. The British prime minister decided that the time for diplomatic equivocation had passed and this enfant terrible had to be told, in no uncertain terms, that it was playing a “double game”. We were not amused, and can now be blamed for “double standards”. Earlier, we had applauded David Cameron when he fired the first shot from his double-barrel: blaming Israel for turning Gaza into a prison. It was more than a diplomatic gaffe. For him, it could be politically fatal. We should make amends and encourage the young prime minister to carry on catching the bulls by their horns.
It is not that I wish him more trouble with Israel or with his political opponents. I also acknowledge that we may at times be in serious trouble. If you must convey a piece of your real mind about your nemesis, it is better done with a preamble; like “how highly we admire him/her”. And just in case you had no idea about the status of a case in your charge, “it is under our active consideration” would save many a blush.
I still believe we would be better served with some straight talk, Pakistan more than others.
If we were to wish the Taliban in Afghanistan – our best bet to get the region rid of the US-led alliance – all the luck, anyone believing in stating things as they are would be highly impressed. If we added that since many of our troubles began with their arrival, we were now willing to facilitate their departure, some of them would jump at the offer. And just in case we did not have the courage to convey that a number of groups targeting us were sponsored by our so-called allies, we could always leak an odd document to Wikileaks. It would be nice if countries like China, Russia and Iran also expressed their discomfiture with Nato’s meddling with the New Great Game.
The Brits would be delighted. They would dump all the debris of the last decade on the senior partner, hang some of its poodles now under trial (like they used to execute generals and admirals who lost wars in faraway places), and make up with their old friends, the Afghan tribesmen. The Americans could benefit too. They will finally get a chance to get even with the “Big Money” that has run the country to bankruptcy, mortgaged its future to China, and created the most expensive war machine in the world that routinely loses to ragtag warriors in this postmodern warfare. And who knows, India may also concede that the real reason it was dragging its feet on reconciliation with Pakistan was that the price for peace exceeded the cost of the status quo.
On second thought, this conversion to the true faith does not seem like a good idea. It would deprive us of the fun in conducting international relations, of running with the hare and hunting with the hound and letting our emissaries run wild in the pursuit of refining diplomatic doublespeak.
In due course, Mr Cameron too will give up his newfound enthusiasm for calling a spade a spade, at the latest, when a former US defence secretary, William Cohen, reminds him of the lesson he learnt from an illustrious British diplomat, Lord Robertson: “Now that you have joined the circus, learn to ride on two horses.” When the prime minister was admonishing us for looking “both ways”, his Indian hosts should have recalled what their own “showman of the century” taught them about life: “It is a circus, in which one must move and look in all directions.” Double-crossers!
Published in The Express Tribune, August 7th, 2010.