| |
Copycatting the US 'war on
terrorism'
By Ehsan Ahrari
It has been stated
more than once about the United States that whatever it
decides to do, it does with style. Doing it with style
in the most neutral sense means doing it systematically
and uniquely. I will avoid all the polemics associated
with doing it with style and stick with its neutral
meaning. Doing it with style is quite true about
America's war against global terrorism. The essence of
the Bush administration's campaign against terrorism
revolves around finding regional allies and expecting
them to bear the brunt of the fight against terrorism,
while fully retaining the prerogatives of unilateral
action. The US's campaign in Afghanistan typified that
style.
Doing it systematically does not
guarantee victory over a complex phenomenon like global
terrorism that has been around for a long time. We have
not even begun to fully comprehend what makes it
flourish. What is important here is that as a democracy,
even in fighting terrorism, the US is expected not to
abandon its concern for human suffering, its commitment
to the rule of law, and observance of human dignity.
Even when it comes under international scrutiny and
censures about its alleged violations of those
principles, as a democracy, it is expected to adopt
discernable adjustments in its global "war on
terrorism". But non-democratic systems are notorious
about consistently and deliberately violating those
principles.
Lo and behold, Russia and China are
dealing with terrorism not only within their own
borders, but also in their contiguous areas - the
Central Asian Republics. There was an anti-terrorism
exercise on August 12, under the auspices of the
Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which comprises
China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and
Uzbekistan. That exercise was conducted in Kazakhstan,
and then in Xinjiang province in China. An important
aspect of that exercise is that it underscores the
evolution of multilateralism among semi-democratic and
authoritarian states that are traditionally oblivious to
the significance of it, or with the problems associated
with it.
Russia is the only country that barely
passes the depiction of a semi-democracy. The rest of
the members of the SCO are dictatorships, with China
arguably residing at the lower end of it because of its
increasing participation in the globalized economy. As
such, it is coming under growing pressure to be mindful
about avoiding extreme practices of brutal handling of
its people. However, that requirement is not rigorously
applied regarding its treatment of the Uighur Muslims of
its Xinjiang province. The Uighur population has been
experiencing intermittent doses of brutality from the
Han rulers of Beijing, as attention of the international
community is focused on global terrorism. Russia is
brutalizing its Chechen population. The failure of the
government of President Vladimir Putin to find a
political solution for that conflict has undeniably
enabled the extremist elements of the Chechen separatist
movement to gain an upper hand. Thus, the cycle of
violence and counter-violence continues.
Even
though the member states of the SCO have been resolute
about fighting "terrorism" since the late 1990s, their
chances of doing so improved only in the aftermath of
the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the US. As
the Bush administration waged a war on the
Taliban-al-Qaeda nexus, it could not have been critical
when the SCO states adopted harsh measures in dealing
with dissident groups, separatists and Islamists in the
name of fighting terrorism.
The SCO came up with
its own version of bumper-sticker policy statements in
its war against "terrorism". For instance, it stated
that it is focused on fighting "three evil forces" ...
separatism, extremism and terrorism. One is left
wondering why the desire of having a separate state is
an evil idea. Wasn't that the genesis of all independent
nations of today? But one also has to think of the
remarkable similarity on George W Bush's use of language
to describe the perpetrators of the September 11 attacks
on the US as "evil doers" and the SCO's use of the
phrase "evil forces".
The US - the erstwhile
champion of human rights of the Buddhists and the
Uighurs of China and the Chechens of the Russian
Federation - lost its high level of interest in
championing their causes. In the post-September 11
environment, the Bush administration seems disinterested
in differentiating between those who are seeking to
liberate themselves from the yolk of communist colonial
rule (Uighur of the Xinjiang province of China and the
Tibetans) from semi-democratic Slavic colonialism
(Chechens of the Russian Federation), and terrorist
groups.
It can be argued that the very presence
of US troops in the Central Asian Republics may be the
devil's bargain, whereby the Bush administration has
decided to ignore the Russian and the Chinese
suppression of their respective ethnic separatists, as
well as the policies of the Central Asian republics in
the name of fighting terrorism. In turn, the SCO members
- especially Russia and China - would cooperate with the
US in its own war against al-Qaeda and its affiliate
terrorist organizations.
From the perspectives
of the four Central Asian members of the SCO, they are
having the best of both worlds in the post-September 11
era. By becoming members of the SCO, they can fully
count on getting military and materiel assistance to
suppress all domestic opposition within their respective
borders in the name of fighting terrorism. But these
republics have gone way beyond their supposed rationale
of fighting terrorism. They have been consistently using
the phrase "Wahhabism" as their most potent enemy, and
have lumped all manifestations and practices of Islamic
observance under that rubric as targets of their brutal
suppression. The US government never paid much attention
to that contentious phraseology before September 11.
However, later - when anyone in the US even with a
passing knowledge of the Middle East claims to know that
Wahhabism is anti-American in its orientation - those
Central Asian Republics are having a field day
suppressing Islam and brutalizing Muslims, along with
Islamists, in the name of fighting Wahhabism.
The US's trailblazing role in initiating the
"war on terrorism" will have to play the lead role in
lowering the level of viciousness of the Central Asian
regimes. Russia and China - whose history of treatment
of their ethnic and religious minorities is covered with
human blood and misery - cannot be expected to abandon
their shameful legacies and establish helpful examples
in this regard. But as the US's own involvement in
Afghanistan and Iraq is facing an uphill battle, there
is little hope that it will play a constructive role in
Central Asia or regarding the SCO at large any time
soon. In the meantime, human suffering under the
auspices of the SCO will continue. The Central Asian
members of that organization might become sanguine in
continuing their current policies of repression and
brutality to contain political dissent. However, as the
spirals of human misery and torment continue to rise in
Central Asia, political instability is likely to return
sooner than later.
Ehsan Ahrari, PhD,
is an Alexandria, Virginia, US-based independent
strategic analyst.
(Copyright 2003 Asia
Times Online Co, Ltd. All rights reserved. Please
contact content@atimes.com for information
on our sales and syndication policies.)
|
| |
|
|
 |
|
