Obama’s new policy

In launching a new policy initiative in US foreign affairs, President Barack Obama is trying to undo the mistakes made by his predecessor, George W. Bush. The latter, it may be recalled, had his popularity graph soaring when he launched a campaign to drive theTaliban out of Afghanistan. It had, on the military level, been successful enough to have propelled one of the most incompetent of US Presidents into a second term. Bush’s Waterloo had been Iraq, a misadventure that landed America into yet another Vietnam type situation. His preoccupation with the post-Saddam chaos in that country had taken the focus away from Afghanistan, enabling the Taliban to find safe havens, regroup and reassert itself. Obama’s Afghan-Pak policy, in essence, will try to reverse the process by diluting US involvement in Iraq and refocus on Afghanistan. His administration believes that the area around the Afghan-Pak border is the cradle of global terrorism, with forces inimical to the West, such as the Al Qaida, joining hands with the Taliban there. However, there are significant differences between Obama’s and Bush’s approaches. Unlike Bush, who had almost given a blank cheque to Pakistan, Obama’s aid to that country would be conditional and subject to scrutiny with regards to effectiveness. While Bush had gone about his campaigns unilaterally, with scant regard for global opinion, Obama is trying to involve as many countries as he can in his war against terrorism.

The change of focus has already been effected, with a proposed surge of additional troops and announcement of non-military aid to Afghanistan and Pakistan. But, like all policies, the chances of failure are as high as of success. No doubt, the realist that he is, Obama has extended a conciliatory hand towards traditional US adversaries such as Iran, knowing full well that their cooperation is sine qua non if international terrorism is to be contained. In fact, such a goal needs active involvement of quite a few key players, apart from America’s allies, which has led Obama to propose formation of a “contact group” with UN assistance. But, while a country like India might be happy to contribute towards the ultimate goal, it is not certain how far countries like Russia or Iran would go to help out the US. Most pertinent, of course, is the ability or otherwise of the administration of Pakistan to play the role assigned to it in the new Afghan-Pak policy. The series of terror-strikes in Pakistan has been constant reminders of how impotent it has so far been in combating home-grown terror. Moreover, many wings of its administration, particularly intelligence agencies like the ISI, are so closely involved with terrorist organisations that it is often hard to tell which side they are on. Pakistan well might prove to be Achilles’ heel of Obama’s Afghan-Pak policy, putting a question mark on its ultimate success. ASSAM TRIBUNE