For political junkies like me, politics
in Pakistan is now as dead as a doornail. The Sharifs won the mandate they wanted, Pakistan People’s Party won Sindh and Imran Khan’s Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaaf (PTI) won (sort of) in KP and as expected nobody won in Baluchistan. So what has happened in the last four months? Price of everything is up, load shedding is still where it was, terrorists are getting friskier and the rupee is going down the proverbial toilet. The government at the centre might not be corrupt but is definitely ‘clueless’.
We have a new president who is an exemplar of anonymity. And a new governor in the Punjab who appeared from out of nowhere and in time will disappear wherever he came from. The only minimal cause of some political ‘amusement’ was another run of the now familiar antics of the governor of Sindh. At present, the only ‘question’ that at least moderately titillates political hacks is about the next army chief. Much as I have tried to get excited about that, frankly it has been difficult. And it does seem that everyone is waiting for 11-12-13.
So, out of necessity I have decided to concentrate on politics in the US. Fun things are going. The Federal Government just shut down except for essential services, and in a matter of weeks if the Republican-led House of Representatives (the lower house) does not agree to raise the ‘debt limit’ things will get very hairy and not just in the US but all over the world. Almost the entire ‘dollar based’ economic system in the world depends on the ‘full faith and credit’ of the US to pay its debts, and that depends on the ability of the US to borrow more money to service its existing debt (sound familiar?). Here it is important to remember that much of the massive dollar reserves of all the rich countries are held in the form of US debt.
As such if the US defaults on its debt, or even comes close, this will throw the financial markets the world over into a state of extreme turmoil. US markets will also take a big hit and the struggling US economy could well start shrinking again. All that is going to be very bad so it is possible that the political establishment in the US will find a way out. The question is why the US political system even allows such a thing to become a possibility. In essence what we are seeing is the emerging conservative wing of the Republican Party (the Tea Party) that instinctively opposes the welfare state and feels that President Barack Obama and his Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) that just went into effect this month is going to expand the welfare state even more and now is the time to prevent it from becoming functional.
All this might seem like an upfront ideological clash between the Tea Party Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats over the size and the reach of the Federal Government. But then there are other factors that need to be considered. First, of course, is that within a year the US will have its midterm elections. The results of these elections could well change the present complexion of both houses of Congress. For instance, if the Republicans maintain control of the US House of Representatives and also gain control of the US Senate, then Obama will become even less effective than he is at present. If however Obamacare becomes functional and popular, the Democrats might get an edge in these elections.
But for some of the Republican politicians especially in the Senate, this is more about the 2016 presidential election. It is an established paradigm in US elections that both liberal as well as conservative candidates once nominated by the major political parties to contest for the US presidency move towards the centre. However, we now have a new breed of ‘Tea Party’ senators who if nominated by the Republicans might not move to the centre. Of these the most intriguing is Senator Rand Paul, Republican from Kentucky. Senator Rand Paul is often described as a ‘Libertarian’. Even though his views on domestic issues are somewhat within the mainstream of conservative Republican politics, he does stand out in one particular aspect and that is his ‘isolationist’ foreign policy. He advocates a smaller military and an end to international interventions.
Here perhaps what happens in Pakistan becomes of interest to US politicians as well as the military establishment. In 2014, the US plans to withdraw most of its combat forces from Afghanistan. If there is an orderly withdrawal and the present Afghan government manages to survive through the next US presidential election then the present US foreign policy will at least be supported by the winner of the next election. On the other hand, if things start falling apart, then there just might be a strong support for a Rand Paul candidacy. US ‘establishment’, therefore, needs a Pakistan that is willing to help the US in their plans and that will depend to a great degree on the internal political situation in Pakistan.
What obviously needs to happen in Pakistan for the US to able to depend on it are two major things. First, the ongoing rash of terrorism must be controlled and the Taliban types brought under the control of the Pakistani government. Second, the Pakistan army must give up on its concept of ‘strategic depth’ and stop supporting directly or indirectly those groups that are at present fighting against the US and its allies in Afghanistan. Two very big ‘ifs’.
So if we believe in conspiracy theories, here is another one. The US ‘security’ establishment has to prevent an ‘isolationist’ like Rand Paul from becoming the US president and that will among other things mean a compliant Pakistan. How the US manages to get a compliant Pakistan is something that we will just have to wait and see.
The writer has practised and taught medicine in the US. He can be reached at [email protected]