... Mr Bill Clinton could go down in American history as a great president, Miss Monica Lewinski notwithstanding. He could now crown it all by nudging nuclear upstarts India and Pakistan to smoke the peace pipe and stop proliferating. A trip to the region next March might yield political dividends, apart from providing a romantic and conciliatory photo-op with the First Lady in the backdrop of the glorious Taj Mahal, thereby giving her a good start in her campaign to become a US senator. Unfortunately, however, a big question mark seems to hang over the merits of the proposed trip.Fundamentalists' hopes
India is in no mood to concede peace in the region. But if India is the real stumbling block in the path of the American president's quest to build enduring peace in South Asia and notch up some kudos, why is the US administration wondering aloud whether Mr Clinton can visit India without gracing Pakistan with a stopover? India, it seems, has persuaded some American policymakers that Pakistan is the "troublemaker" in the region. No, if Washington were to fall for India's ploy and shift away from Pakistan, irreparable damage would be done to the fabric of political stability and democracy in the region.
It is significant that the Islamic fundamentalists in Pakistan are desperately hoping that Mr Clinton will slap unacceptable terms on Pakistan's military leadership and mollycoddle India. That would inevitably push Pakistani society further into the lap of the fundamentalists and fuel the jihad against India and America. The more Pakistan is unfairly isolated in the world, the better the prospects of the fundamentalists; the greater Pakistan's sense of injustice at the hands of the world, the more fertile the breeding ground for Islamic extremism.
Fundamental fears
If Pakistan, with 130 million people and nuclear weapons, tilts into anarchy and becomes a rogue state, India's nightmare in Kashmir will not be a patch on the West's fear of a hundred Osama Bin Ladens. President Bill Clinton should come to India and Pakistan and lean on both to bury the hatchet fairly and equitably. But if, for any reason, a resumption of the peace process seems a non-starter at the moment, he should give South Asia a miss altogether or postpone his trip to later in the year. Going to India and not to Pakistan would be against the interests of India, Pakistan and America.
On the other hand, coming to Pakistan at a time when the country's new leadership is seriously trying to reform state and society and encouraging it to integrate with the world would be in everyone's interest.
Copyright © 2000 Indian Express Newspapers (Bombay) Ltd.
