[R-G] Tariq Ali on Obama: Imperialism with a human face

[Steven L. Robinson]

Tariq Ali on Obama: Imperialism with a human face

By Derrick O'Keefe
Rabble
February 16, 2009

With President Obama set to visit Ottawa this Thursday, Feb. 19, renowned
writer and anti-war campaigner Tariq Ali shares his thoughts on the new
administration's foreign policy. In his recently published book, The Duel,
Ali argues that expanding the war in Afghanistan will only sow more
destruction in that long suffering Central Asian country, and aggravate the
already volatile situation in Pakistan.

In this interview with rabble.ca editor Derrick O'Keefe, Ali discusses the
war, prospects for Palestine under Obama's watch, the rising left-wing tide
in Uncle Sam's backyard and his thoughts on long-time UK resident Michael
Ignatieff.

Derrick O'Keefe: This week, President Obama makes his first official foreign
visit - to Canada, where he will be welcomed in Ottawa by Stephen Harper.
For activists in the U.S., you suggested Obama's inauguration be met with
slogans that recognized the historic moment, but nevertheless pressed
demands, "Congrats Barack. Now out of Kabul, out of Iraq." How should
progressives in Canada greet Obama?

Tariq Ali: They should drop the 'congrats,' which already feels politically
stale, replace it with 'hello' and everything else stays the same. It's
interesting to observe that a number of columnists who are staunch Democrats
are becoming increasingly critical of the 'business as usual' approach
typified by the Obama-Biden team. On the Middle East they have not made a
single criticism of Israel, are backtracking on the withdrawal timeframe on
Iraq and will no doubt, as in the past, continue to support the non-elected
regimes in the area.

Imperialism may have acquired a human face, but has to be judged on its
actions. It's not looking good. On the economy the attempted bipartisanship
has blown up in Obama's face and Paul Krugman's critique in the New York
Times is mild, but accurate.

DO: Obama's 'diplomatic surge' will certainly feature a major effort to get
NATO countries like Canada to boost their troop presence in Afghanistan.
What are the prospects for this charm offensive? Will Afghanistan
increasingly become even more of a strictly U.S. war?

TA: It will. Most European countries are extremely nervous. The British
Ambassador to Kabul has stated that the war cannot be won. A German General
who returned from Afghanistan repeated the same thing. The Spanish are
reportedly on the verge of withdrawal.

Sending 20,000 more U.S. troops will make things worse, not better. My
impression is that Obama's advisers are split on this question. All are
however agreed that the aim is no longer nation-building (always a joke) but
getting a pro or at least not an anti-Western regime without Karzai set up
as soon as possible. This might not be as easy as they think.

DO: Newsweek recently ran a cover story, 'Afghanistan: Obama's Vietnam'.
Could Pakistan become his Cambodia, and what does the appointment of Richard
Holbrooke as his envoy to Pakistan forebode on that front?

TA: Holbrooke is little more than a messenger boy. He will do whatever the
White House wants. But he should have picked up something on his latest
travels including a few facts. A large majority in Pakistan want an exit
strategy from Afghanistan. I have argued recently in my new book and in
TomDispatch that such a strategy is crucial. However it should not entail
handing over Afghanistan to the Pakistani military as happened last time
after the Russians were defeated.

We need a regional solution that involves Iran, Russia, China and India as
well as, of course, Pakistan. If this does not happen the Afghan war will
become uncontrollable leading to further havoc in that country and Pakistan.
Already the chaos in the region has emboldened religious extremists in the
Frontier province and religious warlords have reduced Swat to a fiefdom.
Here it must be said that the decision of the Pakistan state to abandon its
legitimate monopoly of violence and permit armed gangs to burn down schools
and assault women is astonishing. A state that is incapable of protecting
its citizens against violence either local or external is doomed to
collapse. In fact, as is obvious, the events in Swat could not have occurred
had the governments of the country not colluded with some of these groups,
using them to pressure Washington in different ways.

DO: Seemingly borrowing from the Manichean logic of George W. Bush, some
pro-war commentators in Canada have tarred the anti-war movement as being
'supporters' of the Taliban. One of them, Tarek Fatah, a former NDP activist
who has migrated in recent years across the political spectrum all the way
to being a darling of the far right frontpagemag.com, has spread this
accusation against you personally. Would a reading of Clash of
Fundamentalisms be in order for some of these critics of the anti-war
movement?

TA: My views have not changed at all as is obvious to anyone who reads my
books and essays past and present or watches videos from Fatah's old TV
programs. I have, just recently, written of the previous Taliban regime in
Afghanistan as a 'malignant social order' and for that reason insisted on a
national coalition government in that country following the NATO withdrawal.
Given the massive increase in support for the new version of the Taliban
that is the result of the war and occupation, any government has to include
their representatives.

The Western refusal to recognize Hamas was directly responsible for the
Israeli assault on Gaza. I have strongly criticized Hamas in the past but
simply because I disagree with them is not a reason to deny the fact that
they won a majority in an election or that their opponents were corrupt on
every level.

One can go further back in history. The early uprisings against imperial
depredations in the Sudan (Britain), Algeria (France), Libya (Italy) were
all led by religious leaders. At the Toilers of the East conference in Baku
in 1922, the Bolsheviks recognized this fact and Zinoviev called for backing
to the jihad against imperialism. He went over the top, but the point is
that these questions are not new, though the context is different.

The fact that many former Afghan communists supported the NATO occupation is
unlikely to help the secular cause. Nor is the deal done by the secular
Awami National Party provincial government in the North West Frontier
Province (NWFP) with hard-line extremists, agreeing to the IMARGRAH: A
five-point agreement for the enforcement of Shariat in Malakand Division
which has been finalized in the successful talks held between the NWFP
government and Maulana Sufi Muhammad. They were wrong to do so just as they
were wrong in supporting first the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan and more
recently the NATO occupation.

DO: Despite his silence during the massacre of Gaza, and his appointment of
Hilary Clinton, some see an opening for peace and justice in the Middle East
with the Obama administration. Is there any reason for optimism?

TA: I don't see it myself. The victory of far right and fascist-type parties
in Israel, alas, reflects the views of a majority of Israelis. It's no use
pretending otherwise. It is clearly not in the U.S. interests to support
such a regime, but they will. The campaign for boycott, divestment and
sanctions (BDS) so eloquently argued by Naomi Klein is the only way forward
and I'm glad it's becoming truly international.

Later this month I'm speaking at SOAS with Ronnie Kasrils, the former South
African Minister for Intelligence and a Jew hostile to Zionism, to promote
the BDS campaign in Britain.

DO: Moving away from South and Central Asia, and the Middle East, what are
your expectations for Obama's policy on Cuba, and the ALBA and UNASUR
countries in general? Will Obama pay more attention to the U.S. backyard,
which in the past decade has moved substantially to the left?

TA: If he wanted to do a Nixon in Beijing, he should fly to Havana and end
the sanctions. He should then fly to Caracas and meet the Bolivarian
presidents of Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador and Paraguay. And I'm sure Lula of
Brazil and Kirschner of Argentina would also fly in to impress on Obama that
Plan Colombia is a disaster. He should do this, but he won't.

I fear that he is mired in the mess that is the Democratic Party. Also the
economic recession is a magnet for the Presidency. He will rise or fall on
the question of the economy and so doing anything serious in South America
will not appear an attractive option, which is both short-sighted (think of
the large Hispanic population in the U.S.) and foolish.

DO: Obama-mania is a political phenomenon every political operative in the
world is trying to tap into. Here in Canada, some have even touted Michael
Ignatieff as Canada's Obama, or as the 'new Trudeau.' What were your
impressions of Ignatieff during his twenty-plus year stint in the UK?

TA: Trudeau was an independent-minded leader, not a stooge of the
neighbouring country. The Count (as we called Ignatieff) supported the war
in Iraq, defended torture and aligned himself in a dog-like coital lock with
the Bush-Cheney gang. If Canadians elect him as Prime Minister they might as
well join the United States after demanding exceptional status on health,
education and the CBC. Why not? It will be that in everything but name.

>From this you'll have gathered that my impressions of his stint here were
not totally positive.

*********

Tariq Ali is a novelist, historian, political campaigner and one of New Left
Review's editors. After two North American book tours related to his book on
Pakistan, he is working on a set of essays on politics and culture, The
Protocols of the Elders of Sodom and Other Essays, for Verso's Spring 2009
list.

http://rabble.ca/news/interview-tariq

This email was cleaned by emailStripper, available for free from
http://www.papercut.biz/emailStripper.htm