Editorial from 'hindustan times'
Global cop wakes up
The United States plays two roles on the world stage.
The first is that of global policeman. If there is a dispute between two countries, rest assured that the State Department spokesman will have something to say about it. If there is a ‘rogue State’ then US military power will be deployed to deal with it. And if a nation’s human rights record is not to Washington’s liking, then some Congressman will deliver a lecture on the importance of human dignity. This role is always played out to the accompaniment of lofty rhetoric about how America doesn’t really want to get involved but faces no choice because of its desire for a just, stable, global society. Or, as they would say in the Hollywood Westerns of the 1940s and 1950s, ‘it’s a dirty job but somebody’s gotta do it’. When it is in a less self-righteous mood, America admits to playing a second role: that of vengeful mother nation. Hurt any of our citizens, it says, and you will attract a terrible retribution. We will hunt you down and blow you up (but without landing any troops on the ground, because of domestic political considerations).
The beauty of the way these roles are constructed is that they are interchangeable. If the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait threatens America’s oil supply, then it is the vengeful mother nation that strikes back. For public consumption, however, America claims to be playing the first role: global policeman. It is only launching a military operation, it declares, because it cares about national sovereignty, and global stability. If Osama bin Laden’s bombers attack American embassies, then missile-borne retribution is swift to follow. But of course, the world is told that America is only acting against the rogue state of Afghanistan and the terror-sponsoring Taliban regime.
The problem with this two-step approach is that it sometimes breaks down in full view of the world. When the hijackers of IC 814 took the plane to the heart of Taliban territory and appeared to be acting on orders from Islamabad, the global policeman decided to take the week off. Not one statement was even remotely critical of Pakistan emanated from Washington, not even when the hijackers secured the release of two Pakistanis. But the moment one of these released Pakistanis — Maulana Masood Azhar dared to threaten Americans, Washington hurriedly declared its millennium party over and switched to attack mode. The State Department spokesman angrily announced that Washington would hold Pakistan responsible if a single American life was threatened. The message is startlingly clear. Never mind Rupin Katyal whose throat was slit. Never mind the hapless passengers who spent a week inside the hijacked aircraft. Their lives are of no consequence to the world’s policeman. But Azhar has only to make a speech attacking Americans and suddenly Washington is on red alert.
Global cop wakes up
The United States plays two roles on the world stage.
The first is that of global policeman. If there is a dispute between two countries, rest assured that the State Department spokesman will have something to say about it. If there is a ‘rogue State’ then US military power will be deployed to deal with it. And if a nation’s human rights record is not to Washington’s liking, then some Congressman will deliver a lecture on the importance of human dignity. This role is always played out to the accompaniment of lofty rhetoric about how America doesn’t really want to get involved but faces no choice because of its desire for a just, stable, global society. Or, as they would say in the Hollywood Westerns of the 1940s and 1950s, ‘it’s a dirty job but somebody’s gotta do it’. When it is in a less self-righteous mood, America admits to playing a second role: that of vengeful mother nation. Hurt any of our citizens, it says, and you will attract a terrible retribution. We will hunt you down and blow you up (but without landing any troops on the ground, because of domestic political considerations).
The beauty of the way these roles are constructed is that they are interchangeable. If the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait threatens America’s oil supply, then it is the vengeful mother nation that strikes back. For public consumption, however, America claims to be playing the first role: global policeman. It is only launching a military operation, it declares, because it cares about national sovereignty, and global stability. If Osama bin Laden’s bombers attack American embassies, then missile-borne retribution is swift to follow. But of course, the world is told that America is only acting against the rogue state of Afghanistan and the terror-sponsoring Taliban regime.
The problem with this two-step approach is that it sometimes breaks down in full view of the world. When the hijackers of IC 814 took the plane to the heart of Taliban territory and appeared to be acting on orders from Islamabad, the global policeman decided to take the week off. Not one statement was even remotely critical of Pakistan emanated from Washington, not even when the hijackers secured the release of two Pakistanis. But the moment one of these released Pakistanis — Maulana Masood Azhar dared to threaten Americans, Washington hurriedly declared its millennium party over and switched to attack mode. The State Department spokesman angrily announced that Washington would hold Pakistan responsible if a single American life was threatened. The message is startlingly clear. Never mind Rupin Katyal whose throat was slit. Never mind the hapless passengers who spent a week inside the hijacked aircraft. Their lives are of no consequence to the world’s policeman. But Azhar has only to make a speech attacking Americans and suddenly Washington is on red alert.
Comment