NEWS ANALYSIS:

Episode I

With eyes on Persian Gulf oil, Americans let Saddam Hussein commit the blunder of invading Kuwait on August 2, 1990. It is no secret today that the US knew in advance about Saddam’s designs. Some political commentators go to the extent of blaming America for enticing Saddam to commit this folly. Reckless Saddam, as his previous record suggested him to have been, got the green light from Americans that they would remain neutral if Iraq exercised its claims of right for returning Kuwait—viewed by Iraq as its renegade province.

Saddam did what he was nudged to do. Within days, the American mood changed from a spectator to defender. Senior Bush announced the formation of a multilateral force for the liberation of occupied Kuwait. If we see in hindsight, we would be better able to understand what happened in the name of “operation desert storm.” The western media embroidered information about Iraqi war machinery. The Republican Guard, a band of thugs, were made out to be the best trained and equipped army units on earth. Iraqi fire power was exaggerated. SCUDS, which blew up in the midst of flight in the desert, were labeled as awesome advanced-technology weapons. “Patriots” were brought in to shoot them.

In Iraq, a cult of personality was woven around Saddam, the super hero, who could make Uncle Sam run with a single roar. But to the disappointment of millions of believers, it was very much a one-sided show. Thousands of Republican Guards sprinted from Kuwait within a few hours of attack. They were chased and targeted like sitting ducks in the warm sand of the desert. Allied forces stopped short of overrunning Baghdad. The war was over. The Kuwaiti Amir got back his throne. American leadership declared that the purpose has been served. The Rogue Saddam was left untouched to lick his wounds. America did not show an interest in replacing Saddam, as that would have jeopardized American designs to occupy the Arabian Peninsula on the pretext of protecting Arab sheikhs from a rogue ruler and regime. A decade has passed since then. Saddam is sitting over the bent heads of the Iraqi people. Saddam is the raison d’etre for American military bases in the Gulf, with the expenses being borne by Sheikhdoms.

Episode II

Now Saddam is replaced with Osama bin Laden. The Al-qaeda organization and the Taliban regime are Republican Guards and Iraq, respectively. The US has declared war on Taliban, Al-qaeda, Osama, and whoever makes the mistake of remaining neutral in this war, as Bush made plain in his statement in Congress the other day.

A sane person could not endorse what happened in the early hours of September 11 in New York City and Washington D.C. But the dust that it has stirred up in the international political arena could also not be endorsed by all those of us who believe in a just and peaceful settlement of the issue. Since September 11, the American leadership has been engaged in the worst form of jingoism. Fingers were quickly pointed at Osama and the Taliban, and the American leadership has declared war on Osama and his terrorist network. And yes, the Taliban share the blame with him because they have harbored the terrorist network.

But Afghanistan’s people, already living under Stone Age conditions, are being pounded with smart bombs and cruise missiles. In a reciprocal gesture, the Taliban army has declared a holy war on US and whoever comes to their path. Pakistan has sided with the US-led international alliance, and is providing logistical support to US forces. More than three air bases of Pakistan are taking US Special Forces to and from Afghanistan.

Thus American forces have come once again to South and central Asia, ostensibly to protect what they call the interests of the free world.

But the question is, is the Taliban really worth being attacked and beaten in a war commanded by the mightiest army on earth? Is it not like hunting and hitting a sparrow with a missile? Are Osama and his terrorist network worthy of having a war declared on them? No? Then what real motivation is behind the American plan to come physically into this region?

Are the Taliban really a potential danger for peace and stability of this region in particular and of the world in general? Are they capable of harboring, nurturing, and exporting international terrorism? Have they the means and resources to do so? What were American intelligence organizations doing when a secluded person like Osama was allegedly masterminding the terrorist attack on the US? Where were the American tools of eavesdropping which, when used by NSA, could not let fall unnoticed a leaf from a tree in a backyard? When their tools of deciphering and interception could read any electronic communication, can a person living in Afghanistan issue orders and directions to his men in Europe and America unheard, unnoticed? Were the terrorists allowed to commit this blunder, as Americans let Saddam commit his when Americans wanted a big reason to go to Persian Gulf?

Could this all have to do with Afghanistan’s important proximity to oil- and gas-rich Central Asia? Maybe they had no idea of the scope of death and destruction the September 11 events would bring. Maybe they were caught unaware, as mistakes are part of every mortal’s life.

Here it would be wise to remember that, after the end of communist rule in Afghanistan, American policymakers intentionally let Muslim extremists grow and flourish in the region, to the point that this became a real apprehension for Central Asian States—enough of a concern to seek help and advice of big brother.

Muslim fundamentalism and radicalism arguably were part of American strategy. Muslim radicals were the darlings of the Pentagon at the height of the Cold War. Both had one common enemy: the infidel, atheist USSR. The CIA used these forces successfully against the Soviet threat to the so-called free world. All the biggest bad guys America wants to punish today were once on the payroll of the CIA. It was the CIA that brought Osama to Afghanistan as a civil engineer to construct bunkers in the hilly terrain of Afghanistan to aid in the combat with communists.

The Quest for Central Asian Oil

The region of the Caspian basin and Central Asia has been dubbed as the second Persian Gulf, suggesting that the oil and gas reserves are enormous. Equally important are the obstacles to getting the oil and gas generated to the open market, as the region is land-locked. Cross-border pipelines, political instability and economic fragility in the region are all worries for the big players. Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan are major producers of these precious natural assets, while Georgia and Uzbekistan are transit states. The peripheral states—Armenia, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan—although not producers of either oil or gas, play significant roles in regional matters.

American policy makers are up for reducing dependence on Persian Gulf energy supplies. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, America has been trying get unhindered access to the Caspian Sea basin and Central Asian oil and gas resources. American oil giant Exxon Mobil is one of the largest foreign players in developing Central Asian and Far Eastern resources. It has major oil interests in Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan, and gas interests in Turkmenistan and on Russia's Sakhalin Island to the north of Japan. BP Amoco, Shell and other oil giants of the West are also engaged in oil exploration in the region. Turkey, with the backing of the US, wants Kashgan oil to flow through a pipeline from the Caspian to Baku in Azerbaijan, where it can join another pipeline to Turkey’s Mediterranean coast. It is believed that drivers of U.S. foreign policy vis-à-vis Central Asia and the Caspian Sea basin include securing access to the region’s energy resources and pipeline investments for U.S. companies. China, Russia and Iran are America’s main rivals in the region. They would not let Americans and their lesser Western European partners exploit this oil-rich region at the expense of their own interests.

Here is the point where this great game begins. Americans have now got the upper hand in their oil game. The world could not point to America’s real intention and motivation, as it would be unseemly to raise such an objection at a time when Americans are collecting the remains of those killed in the aftermath of the insane September 11 attacks. But other players who are active in the Central Asia region will not let America’s presence go unchallenged for time immemorial. The matter of who will control and have a say over the region will certainly arise in coming times.

Sometime back, Russia secured a contract with Turkmenistan to purchase 30 billion cubic meters of gas each year. This further undermines the trouble-plagued US-backed Tran Caspian Gas Pipeline—a pipeline for Turkmen gas across the Caspian Sea and out to Turkey. Russia sees both opportunity and trouble coming from nearby. Moscow views the Central Asian region as a natural part of its sphere of influence because of its contiguous borders, centuries of domination, and the large number of ethnic Russians living there. The construction of pipeline networks to China's western borders, under the control of the China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC) and other large Chinese energy companies, also opens up the potential for China to exploit the huge energy resources of the former Soviet republics of Central Asia.

A study of China's energy plans by the US think tank, the Brookings Institution, has already warned about the potential for a strategic realignment between Japan and China to the detriment of the US. Sergei Troush wrote: “One possible tendency might be growing economic and security cooperation between China, Japan, and Korea... The decreasing importance of the sea-routes in the Indian and Pacific Oceans could see the eventual reshaping of the basic security arrangement between United States and Japan.”

Iran assumes it is the natural protector of Central Asia because of long historical, ethnic, linguistic, and religious ties. Tehran also worries that U.S. military links to Central Asian states are part of a global effort to encircle and isolate it. Iran wants a pipeline to the Persian Gulf, where the oil could be shipped to the fast-growing East Asia market.

Mutual self-interest has brought China and Russia together in the “Shanghai Five” group of nations, along with the Central Asian states of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan. Through the grouping, China has sought to align Russia economically and politically toward China and north-east Asia, while Russia has sought to preserve its traditional influence in Central Asia. The South China Morning Post commented after the last summit of the group in July: “If anything is going to bring the two countries and their two economies closer, it is Russian exports of its vast oil and gas wealth.”

More than economic considerations are at work, though. Particularly since the NATO war on Yugoslavia and the subsequent occupation of Kosovo, a feature of Sino-Russian relations is fear that their own separatist strife—as in Chechnya or Xinjiang—will be exploited by the United States to intervene in the region. As far as western industrialist countries are concerned, they are interested in gaining accreditation and passport to explore and invest in the region at their own terms, without any hindrance from regional powers. The US is the self-styled champion and guardian of that goal.

It is therefor not difficult to understand the real motives behind America’s military build-up in this region. The Taliban is not the real target—just the scapegoat. Americans were looking for some good reason to intervene, and the terrorist attacks in New York City and Washington, DC provided it. The American leadership is trying hard to maximize the count of nations under the American shield. The Taliban, a horde of medieval warriors, are thus called upon to face the most modern army on earth.

I think that American forces will not be leaving the region once the conflict is over. They will remain there to influence the political and economic course of the region. As the czars of Russia had the obsession of gaining access to the warm waters of Indian Ocean, so the U.S. has an obsession with being a policy maker in Central Asia.

Meanwhile, the gullible world is oblivious of what is behind this game, and is being asked to queue behind the Americans. “Either you are with us or with the terrorist,” said Bush, the neo-Caesar, with arrogance.

But we must inform ourselves and make our own choices. We are neither with terrorists nor with those who conceived of this intervention plan years ago as an extension to their agenda. Both of these are two sides of same coin. Both represent forces that oppose the progressiveness of history. America is trying to shape the world in line with its narrow short-sighted interests, no doubt in favor of a few rich nations and people. It is akin to the birth of classic imperialism—the rise of a new Roman Empire!

What the real US goals are in Central Asia, only the people sitting in the Oval office and Pentagon know. We, the people of this region, are certainly destined to find ourselves at the losers’ end under the US scenario. There is a saying that, “Every time history repeats itself the price goes up.” And what price the world has to pay this time after farce of the Gulf War, God only knows.

We should keep our minds and souls free of fear, and the only compulsion we should allow ourselves is to seek always to understand, and to stand with the truth—truth being the only real weapon of the brave and the miserable.

Email Dr. Rind at: thinkers@cyber.net.pk