Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
100 words for 100 days: submit your 100 word essay and get published on AlterNet
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

India's Wondering, 'If the U.S. Can Bomb Pakistan, Why Can't We?'

Posted by Ian Welsh, Firedoglake at 9:49 AM on December 2, 2008.


The American doctrine that it's ok to bomb other countries if you invoke the word "terrorism" is a very dangerous one.

Looks like the Indian press wants the same rights to bomb other countries the US has been claiming, and they're trying to use Obama's words to justify it:

Sovereign nations have the right to protect themselves, US president-elect Barack Obama said on Monday, when asked if India could follow the same policy he advocated during his election campaign — of bombing terrorist camps in Pakistan if there was actionable evidence and Islamabad refused to act on it. 

The Times goes on to note that Obama carefully caveated his remarks, noting that India should only act unilaterally if the association is proved beyond a doubt and if Pakistan doesn't deal with it themselves.

Nonetheless, this is a particularly ominous development.  US bombing and incursions into Pakistan are already destabilizing the country, and the Pakistani military and intelligence services have become unreliable instruments, using them to crack down on Pakistanis at the behest of outsiders has caused a great deal of dissent.

Pakistan will doubtless do something, but whether it will be sufficient for the Indians is another question.  But I can think of nothing more likely to either cause a war or cause Pakistan to implode than India bombing inside its territory.  The long history of distrust between the two countries would make this the equivalent of Russia bombing a terrorist camp in the US.

The American doctrine that it's ok to bomb other countries if you invoke the word "terrorism" is a very dangerous one.  Combined with the breaking up of Serbia, it is an assault on the over 350 year old idea of Westphalian internal sovereignty.  The consequences could be war between Pakistan and India, just as Georgia's breakup by the Russians was justified by the example of Serbia.  "If the West can break up an ally of ours, why can't we break up an ally of the West's?"

"If the US can bomb Pakistan whenever it feels like by using the justification of terrorism, why can't India?"

Digg!


What a Better Stimulus Bill Would Look Like
What could Obama have proposed instead of tax cuts? Some very quick examples.
January 7, 2009.
The Attacks on Gaza: Orwell in Israel
"The government ordered the strikes on Hamas only after it saw no other way to stop rocket attacks on its southern towns ... "
December 27, 2008.
Riots Spread in Europe: How Long Till They Break Out in the U.S.?
When will Americans decide they've had enough and start rioting?
December 12, 2008.
How Fumbling the Bailout Led to the Chicago Sit In
Bank of America could have kept Republic Windows open if they hadn't been distracted buying up their competitors.
December 8, 2008.
Advertisement
Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Why shouldn't India defend itself?
Posted by: NthnBrazil on Dec 2, 2008 10:13 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why should we have anything to say about India responding to what amounted to a military attack in any way it's leadership sees fit?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

How?
Posted by: JoshuaLudd on Dec 2, 2008 11:20 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How would it actually PROTECT them? It would escalate the situation, no doubt... but would it actually PROTECT anyone from anything?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Depends Posted by: NthnBrazil
» And even if it were.... Posted by: JoshuaLudd
India and unilateral attack on Pakistan
Posted by: TERRIROBSON on Dec 2, 2008 11:25 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The precendent set for BOMBING another country on the pretext of war on terror has taken the world to a dark place in relation to so-called security. Lets remember that the ISI & CIA are in very close communication, nothing happens without the CIA's knowledge.
I believe this has been an "agent provoceteur"
type mission. The black ops going on around the world due to the MI6 the CIA and other alphabet (Gov.) agencies is what is keeping this world in turmoil, all this to supposedly be spreading Democracy. bull

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

How disgustingly appropriate...
Posted by: Quannah on Dec 2, 2008 11:00 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
THIS is Bush's legacy. What a gift he has given to the world! The "Bush Doctrine" is going to be with us all for a long, long time. But the effects of the Doctrine of Pre-Emptive War will be felt by the innocent in places like Pakistan, India, Kashmir, etc., for generations to come, and they have no one but BUSH to thank! He must be so proud!

The Current Occupant of the White House doesn't care what his failed policies have wrought, though. It's not like he'll be travelling to India or Pakistan any time in the future!

Enjoy your upcoming retirement, George!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Yeah, thanks George, but ....
Posted by: monkeywrench on Dec 3, 2008 8:39 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ain't blowback a bitch? Especially if it goes nuke.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Please...
Posted by: adp3d on Dec 3, 2008 8:54 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...don't lose sight of the fact that both of these countries are nuclear capable and one(India) has been allowed(with blessing of the Bush administration) to be a non-party to non-proliferation agreements. A hell of a crisis for the new American president to have to deal with.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]