![]() |
![]() |
||
|
To Each His Own NukePosted on Nov 20, 2008The cynical view of national sovereignty holds that it belongs only to those who can defend it. This was said recently at the Pentagon concerning American manned and unmanned attacks inside Pakistan, in violation of Pakistan’s sovereignty. Terrorism also ignores sovereignty. There is a reciprocal relationship between international terrorism and American and NATO international counterterrorism, or supposed pre-emption of terrorism, in that both ignore sovereignty—whose legal definition is a nation’s undivided and exclusive jurisdiction over its affairs, and absolute right to defend itself. The closest to an absolute means for defense of sovereignty is the possession of nuclear weapons. This is why such countries as Iran and North Korea have nuclear programs meant—or so it is assumed—to provide them with nuclear weapons. The motive for nuclear weapons proliferation is defense of national sovereignty. Proliferation does not itself imply aggressive intent: such weapons are literally useless in an aggressive role. The only exception to this rule is regional, between nuclear and non-nuclear states. However, India and Pakistan have gone to great expense to re-create for themselves the same MAD (mutual assured destruction) relationship that prevailed between the U.S. and the Soviet Union (and China) during the Cold War. Advertisement A nuclear defense of national sovereignty is meaningful—if it is ever meaningful—only in extreme circumstances, and if the threat comes from another nuclear power would probably prove suicidal; hence unlikely to be employed. Nevertheless, possession of nuclear weapons makes the other side think twice. The propaganda argument usually made about Iran is that nuclear weapons would allow that country to threaten the United States, Israel and Europe. The missile defense that the Bush administration has wanted to build in Poland and Czechoslovakia is not meant to defend anything. It was designed to have a political effect by dividing “old” Europeans from the “new” ones who support the American proposal. Above all, it is meant to intimidate Russia. It is not directed at Iran, for whom a nuclear missile attack on the West would be nonsensical, as Teheran and Washington both know. The purpose of U.S. pressure on the U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency to provide further justification for Security Council sanctions on Iran is to prevent that country from obtaining the only feasible deterrence it could present to a future American or Israeli intervention in that country. Israel has pressed hard for a U.S. attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities, not because it fears nuclear aggression by Iran, which is inconceivable and would be suicidal folly. Israel’s concern is that if Iran acquires one or several nuclear weapons, it would deter conventional attack by its enemies, notably the United States. The existence of a nuclear Iran, despite the strategic military insignificance of its nuclear force, would also deprive Israel of the political power it derives from being the only nuclear-armed state in the Middle East. Pakistan’s nuclear weapons obviously do not deter the United States’ repeated violations of its sovereignty with bombing and raids into the country, nor does it dissuade the American president-elect from promising to continue (or enlarge) those sovereignty violations if Pakistan fails to capture and deliver al-Qaida and Osama bin Laden to the United States. The weapons were not intended to do so. They relate exclusively to India. However, there is another and much more practical penalty for American disregard of Pakistani sovereignty (even when it may be secretly authorized by the new government in Islamabad). This policy exacts a heavy political cost among the Pakistani population, and in the long run could turn Pakistan into another Afghanistan, even more dangerous to the United States than the war in Afghanistan is now. The most recent American missile launched from Afghanistan into Pakistan struck a village some 30 miles inside the country, well beyond the tribal region where the Taliban are. U.S. officials make the usual claim that the victims were Taliban or foreign militants. Villagers and a local official made the usual response that the victims were civilians and included no militants. A large Islamist political party announced that in retaliation it would block the major routes used by the U.S and NATO to supply their forces in Afghanistan. The Wall Street Journal reports that one important supply route running from Peshawar through the Khyber Pass into Afghanistan was reopened only last Monday after a week’s shutdown because of previous Taliban attacks, and now is again blocked for security reasons. Some 75 percent of supplies for Afghanistan pass through Pakistan. According to officials on the scene, the latest attacks on supply convoys are of unprecedented sophistication. The maxim that sovereignty depends on the military ability to defend it can be reversed. The systematic military violation of sovereignty can eventually generate the defeat the policy is intended to prevent. Visit William Pfaff’s Web site at www.williampfaff.com. © 2008 Tribune Media Services Inc. Previous item: Bailout or Bust: How to Save the Big Three From Themselves Next item: Steering Clear of Disaster in Detroit Elsewhere: . CommentsAre you a Truthdig member yet? Login now, or register with Truthdig. Add Your Comment |
By Folktruther, November 25, 2008 at 3:22 pm #
A Khokar-Thank you for the article and the blog. I see I misinterpreted where you were coming from. Is it your opinion that the US has a operative plan to dismember Pakistan?
Report thisBy trisha, November 25, 2008 at 12:23 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Well, once Osama has been killed/captured, we shall see whether the U.S. will leave Pakistan/Afghanistan. My suspicion is they will not… After all, “Killing is our business. Business is good.”
Report thisBy A Khokar, November 24, 2008 at 9:25 pm #
Folktruther,
It is an old habit of the oppressors to create enemy through provocation and eliminate them.
I will like to draw your attention to an article to explain the subject situation on the ground. After going through, I hope you will be drawn nearer to the reality.
Here is the link: The Third US Battle Ground: PAKISTAN.
http://www.adab-arz.co.uk/?p=30
Report thisBy KPinSEA, November 24, 2008 at 8:05 pm #
United Nations Charter, Chapter 1, Article 2, paragraph 4:
“All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.”
These days, we act like somebody else drafted this language, when in fact, we used to value these principles of international relations and consider them vital for avoiding a disastrous World War.
How the times change as we elevate Expediency above all other considerations.
Report thisBy Folktruther, November 24, 2008 at 12:54 pm #
That’s an astonishing claim,that the US is trying to de-nuclearize Pakistan by force, A Khokar. It is true that the NYTimes ran an article that there is eveidence that the US is planing to tear the country apart, as it did the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia, and Biden wants to do in Iraq.
But creating anarchy to move troops in? And then what? And China has built a highway to a port on the Arabian Sea to process Persian Gulf oil. Are they going to permit this?
And why are we all on the spot?
Report thisBy A Khokar, November 24, 2008 at 7:50 am #
Ooops
For Chreek air base in the comment; Please read Creech Air force base.
Report thisThis Creech Air Force Base is formerly known as Indian Springs Air Force Auxiliary Field, itis a United States Air Force base located one mile (2 km) north of the central business district of Indian Springs, in Clark County, Nevada, United States. It is about 35 miles (56 km) northwest of Las Vegas and 45 miles (72 km) northwest of Nellis Air Force Base.
The host unit is the 432d Wing, which has six operational squadrons, one maintenance squadron, and MQ-9 Reapers and MQ-1 Predators.
Along with being the aerial demonstration training site for the Thunderbirds, the base plays a major role in the ongoing war on terrorism. The base is home to the MQ-1 Predator unmanned aerial vehicle which flies daily in Afghanistan and Iraq. The base is also home to the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Battlelab whose mission is to work with the war fighter and identify problems that can be solved using innovative UAV solutions.(Source Wikipidia and CNN)
By A Khokar, November 24, 2008 at 7:36 am #
Dear All,
Most of You are on the spot.
There is no secret that while Musharraf was in power, CIA in collaboration with Inter services Inelegance agency (ISI) of Pakistan were operating supposedly against the terrorism of Al Qaeda and her safe havens found along Pak-Afghan a porous border line stretch; especially in Pakistan Federal Administrated area called FATA.
With the departure of Musharraf; as expected the CIA crossed the floors and turned against ISI.ISI plan stood compromised.CIA was able to infiltrate the FATA area and with the aim to destabilize new Pakistan Government and create anarchy, was able to raise a another local Taliban faction called TTP ( Tehrik e Taliban of Pakistan). This TTP is very well fed and exceptional well armed and equipped. Present day all the turmoil and anarchy found in Pakistan is the out come of moves of TTP orchestrated by CIA; including the recent attack on Marriot Hotel Islamabad.
Pakistan army has moved in the Area of FATA in North side of it to quell the anarchist of TTP and have been successful to a large extent. CIA finding it plan getting awry is retaliating with the drone attacks in the area where there is peace and people are pro Pak government. Drone are being cotrolled directly from U.S. air bases like Chreek in Nevada. This is the plan of CIA to provoke and create enemy by killing innocent people in order to avail a pretext and later carry out a full fledge attack to move in.
With the prevalent anarchy; the ultimate goal of CIA is to declare Pakistan a insecure country which is unable to safe guard its nuclear assets and thus to move in and de-denuclearize Pakistan.
Report thisBy cyrena, November 23, 2008 at 10:04 pm #
Felicity,
You hit it here..
“...What’s the real reason we’re bombing and killing Pakistanis - it can’t be the one we’re advertising to the world….”
The real agenda definitely isn’t being advertised to the world, just like it never is with this regime of Gangsters in DC. Just like Iraq wasn’t.
I don’t know if I can adequately speculate myself, on why they’re doing this in Pakistan, but I’m guessing cover-up to be part of it. This is the change since they no longer have their man, Musharraf, to run things.
Then again, this is not uncommon behavior for the gangsters. They’ve been bombing other civilians, (Somalia comes to mind) anywhere they feel like it, and without notification to, or authorization from, the sovereign states where they do this shit!!
Report thisBy Inherit The Wind, November 23, 2008 at 11:40 am #
It’s rare for me to have so little disagreement with a Wm. Pfaff article but this is one of them.
But Yellowbird2525’s “analysis” is nothing but stream-of-consciousness gobbledegoop, as usual.
His “facts” are nothing of the sort. For example, he mis-quotes Woodrow Wilson. Wilson’s reference to a small “group of willful men” referred specifically to Republicans, and, more specifically to those who blocked ratification of the League of Nations. The reasons are too complicated and too tangential for this thread, but the point is clear: YB is mis-citing Wilson. He was not at all complaining that America and the American economy was really a puppet for the few. It was all about the League.
He does it again with the crappery about Pearl Harbor, a bullshit conspiracy fantasy first floated by a dis-gruntled and semi-senile Charles Beard and picked up by all the haters of FDR for upsetting the traditional elite’s position. A read of Roberta Wohlstetter’s seminal work massively documents what REALLY happened-document by document.
I have NO idea what YB’s South American connection is, other than some sort of scream about American imperialism that’s totally irrelevant to Pfaff’s argument, particularly nuclear power.
Report thisBy prgill, November 23, 2008 at 4:44 am #
Amen, TAO Walker.
I am a great admirer of the Native American vision, perhaps even of the Tiyoshpaye Way.
As a “Native European” whose “enslaved” ancestors came to North America some three hundred years ago and eventually settled in the Upper Ohio Valley, along the Allegheny River, “my way” has been a “way” of “private property”, “personal perfection” and “social progress”.
The European Way way may no longer be self-evident, but we are all, Asians, Europeans, Africans and Native Americans alike limited in that we are “prisoners of consciousness”, our humanity an affirmation of mortality, our spirituality a matter of choice.
Report thisBy TAO Walker, November 22, 2008 at 8:03 pm #
This is some spectacle the world’s “civilized” peoples are making of theirselfs here in these latter days. They look down their noses at those of us they deride as “stone-age” primitives, survivors of their own relentless viciousness, even as their silly chain of slight variations on the “slingshot” motif threaten to quite literally blow them all to hell.
What their fear-mongering rulers want to keep hidden from them, among other things, is that as civilizations go the present one is by-far the most crude and “primitive,” in its methods and motives, ever to run self-destructively amok here….though even the more “sophisticated” versions have all reached the same ignominious and foregone conclusion. Any Person here in Indian Country would be mortified beyond endurance to be seen preening and prancing and posturing the way “modern” domesticated people are so much inclined to do….most especially in their increasingly dirty and ragged “sovereign state” costumes.
It’s ALL make-believe, tame Two-legged Sisters and Brothers….your money, your “power,” your philosophy, your “brains-of-the-outfit” conceits, your civilized “exceptionalism.” It’s all nothing but a “product” of your fevered collective imaginations.
The Tiyoshpaye Way within the Living Arrangement of our Mother Earth within the Song ‘n’ Dance of Life Herownself is, on-the-other-hand, the real McCoy. Come on out of that house-of-(marked)-cards, that hall-of-mirrors you’ve been caught in, and that’s right this minute falling-down catastrophically on top of you, and take up your lives as free wild natural Human Beings.
This old Indian’s heart will be so happy for us all when you do.
Hokahey!
Report thisBy M Henri Day, November 22, 2008 at 8:27 am #
Aside from the fact that Mohammed Mosaddeq’s government in Iran was overthrown by a CIA led coup in 1953, long before Saddam Hussein found his true metier, yellowbird2525‘s analysis seems to conform to the facts of recent history, so far as they are known. «Deceit» does indeed seem to be an adequate description. One can’t help wonder how the task that faces president-elect Obama - the dismantling of the US Empire and the acceptance of a multi-polar world - will be described by contemporary media - in the event that he handles it so well that those media - and we - make it through the interregnum….
Report thisBy yellowbird2525, November 22, 2008 at 1:02 am #
Day of deceit: a book, one of many, took 16 years of researching thru documentation of paperwork to provide the information that Pearl Harbor was a deliberate set up by the USA who intentionally provoked Japan into attacking us that day & that way, wanting to “prove” the “supremacy” of the USA Gov; which by the way, according to Pres Wdodrow Wilson, during his term of office (and who better to know than the Pres of a country) that we, the USA, were no longer the land of the free, nor even of majority vote: but rather under the dictates & rules of a few dominant men. The “term” democracy indicates that it is run by the WILL OF THE PEOPLE: and that is not the case at all. This nation has never been a “democracy” irregardless of what is said repeatedly; Iran would not bow their knee to the USA so they buttered up Saddam Hussain, flattering him, giving him lots of $ & other things they later charged him with using (it is illegal but they have never been a law abiding group anyway); they weaponed him up & helped him overthrow the Gov of Iran; then they put in the Shah: because THIS is the truth of the matter; anyone NOT going along with THEIR rule, is overcome & replaced with dictatorship who are cruel & inhumane to the people: just exactly like the USA is. THIS is the reason they are trying to claim that the Gov of Iran is “insane”; also, there is an oil pipeline there; go to http://www.democracynow.org & type in “drilling and killing:” Nicaragua; dictatorship; who is there? USA Gov; go to Colombia: who is behind the killings of folks trying to make a decent living? Look to the Corps of the USA; (BTW, seen all the things in stores recently from Colombia?) Bill brought $800,000 for Hillary’s campaign (remember, supposedly she was opposed to it) (colombia trade agreement); wondering how this would play out (Round Table) within 2 weeks political advisor on C span stating it had “already been signed into agreement back in 2006” & just “expired” 1/08 & Congress extended to 9/08; LIES LIES DECEIT & DECEPTION is the name of dictatorship known as “democracy”; while “your view” is noted, THIS is what will be done. Figure it out folks. BTW, how can the USA pay $20,000 a month for hundreds of mercenaries known as Black Water & 70 more just like them? Others, hundreds of contractors there getting $7,000 a MONTH: all from the good ol USA who is of course “broke” repeatedly to all it’s citizens; Yep, and the cow farts according to them, is the cause of all the air pollution, not the cars, & factories they promised to have cleaned up by 1970; then 1980; here it’s 2008 & they are still belching poison into the air. The “businesses” will decide what to do & when to do it declared Bush; Gov is a tool for Business to tell it what to do declared Peter Buckley; now you know.
Report thisBy Folktruther, November 21, 2008 at 7:11 pm #
The real reason the US is bombing Pakistani villages, Felicity, is to avoid losing the war until Bush and Obama have left office. As all military and geo-strategic people know, the war is unwinnable and what there is to win, Pipelineistan to the north, has already opted for Russia and China’s SHANGHAI COOERATION ORGANIZATION.
So the bombing of Pakistan is a face saving measure for the US to avoid defeat as leader of Nato, who are threatening to withdraw anyway. The whole Osama and Al Quida thing is a hoax to justify the fraudulent War on Terrorism.
But Americans are reluctant to believe that the US would bomb weddings, funerals, and villagers homes for such geo-strategic reasons, except for the racist anti-Muslim wing, who approve it. But that is what is happening, and not only in Pakistan and Afghanistan.
Report thisBy felicity, November 21, 2008 at 2:44 pm #
Is this reasonable? We’ll stop bombing Pakistan when she turns over bin Laden and Al Qaeda - the whole frickin organization? - to us. We’re requiring Pakistan to do what we were unable to do for lo these how many years? Am I missing something?
What’s the real reason we’re bombing and killing Pakistanis - it can’t be the one we’re advertising to the world.
Report thisBy prgill, November 21, 2008 at 8:56 am #
The crux of the “sovereignty” problem is that rule of law is possible only where there exists a hierarchy of authority and where disobedience or disrespect is sanctionable.
The “sanctioning” power of the United States, which is not to say of the “international community”, is a “moral authority” granted, in part, by the international community, and for the rest, “assumed” by the United States. We assume such moral authority requires enforcement, hence provide a standing armed force.
The real question is how might we organize and enforce the sactioning power of the international community. A second question is whether geo-political regions (as an expression of real-politik) should tolerate the sactioning authority of powers outside of the region.
It is naive to think that “sovereign states” will give up their sovereignty without compensatory action from those who are seen as a threat. Threats however, are geographically defined AND limited. Iran will not back down so long as Israel is perceived as a threat to Arab unity. Reconciliation is not possible without Israeli acknowledgement of the millions who were expelled in 1948 and who continue to be disenfranchised to this day. The same is true for other regional conflicts, as for instance, the conflict between India and Pakistan.
Thank-you William Pfaff, and Truthdig for publishing this thoughtful piece.
Report thisBy Outraged, November 21, 2008 at 2:31 am #
I happened on this while reading the news and thought others might be interested also. It is a 271 page report from “The Center for Defense Information” .....so, nope I haven’t read it yet…just getting started. However, it is available electronically for a limited time only and described this way:
November 14, 2008
“America’s Defense Meltdown: Pentagon Reform for President Obama and the New Congress” is a anthology written by 13 retired military officers, Pentagon insiders and experienced civilian experts. It lays out for the new president, Congress and the “think-tank” community in Washington a description of the scope and depth of our national defense problems, and - more importantly - it proposes solutions derived from the nature of the problems, rather than the willingness - or lack thereof - among politicians and bureaucrats in the Pentagon and Congress to address them.”
(Scroll to bottom for PDF link)
Report thishttp://www.cdi.org/program/document.cfm?DocumentID=4407&StartRow=1&ListRows=10&appendURL;=&Orderby=D.DateLastUpdated&ProgramID=37&from_page=index.cfm