A few years ago, it bought another bizarre Pakistani story that atomic scientist A Q Khan, the author of the ‘Islamic bomb’, was exporting fissile technology and hardware to South Korea, Iran, Libya, etc., entirely on his own, without the knowledge and consent of the Pakistani government. The US also believed Iraq’s Saddam Hussein was nuclear-armed and posed a big danger to the civilized world. And, Afghanistan would be better off under a hard-line Islamist Taliban rule than under a Russian stooge, President Mohammad Najibullah, in 1996. Is the office of the US president so gullible as to believe and accept such unreliable information and jump into conclusive action, including using all its military might, if necessary, to set things right?

Actually, it may appear that most US military actions are based on home-spun assumptions than on truly reliable information. Consider this: can any ordinary person ever be allowed to build a private fortress at a garrison town across an elite military academy, leave alone for housing a dreaded terrorist such as Osama, the mastermind behind the destruction of New York’s World Trade Centre killing over 3,000 innocent people, without the permission, support and surveillance of the Pakistani military as also of the government at the highest level and local Abbottabad administration? The owner of the building must had obtained all clearances and the no-objection certificate from the military authorities before the first brick was even moved to the site. The building was expected to be under constant vigil by the army intelligence wing, if not fully guarded by the army, to find out and cross check at least the minimum details about its real occupants – their names, their descriptions including individual pictures, where did they come from, their financial and social status, and the purpose of living there, etc. Yet, Pakistan pleads innocence and the US, though not quite ungrudgingly, accepts the Pakistani official version.

No question was asked about how a government scientist could indulge in export of fissile materials and technology without the full involvement of the government machinery and administration. It is impossible and illogical as well. A Q Khan did not own a private factory to manufacture critical nuclear hardware and fissile material. How did the Pakistani customs authorities clear the highly sensitive nuclear export cargoes year after year without inspection and also without a specific order from the government? The US never pushed hard the issue with the Pervez Musharraf administration to force a session with Khan to unearth the real truth. Such an event would have embarrassed both Pakistan for nuclear smuggling and the US for keeping company with such a rogue state. The US accepted the Pakistani version and let off its government of nuclear smuggling charges in the interest of a bigger long-term American engagement plan in the region.

The USA is not averse to terror outside its territory as long as it gives the country an opportunity to fight against such acts. The same is the attitude of Pakistan. Paradoxically, their international involvement in fighting with terror outfits has transported terror back on their home soil as well, both in the US and in Pakistan, more nilly than willy. Both the US and Pakistan are beneficiaries as well as victims of terror. The support and intervention to terror, external and internal, have ensured a huge international fund flow into Pakistan from countries such as the US, several West Asian hegemonies and emirates over the years to support its otherwise fragile economy. The Obama administration provided Pakistan $7.5 billion civilian aid over a five-year period starting 2010.

Terror or armed-conflict leading to terror is a big business. No one knows this better than the USA. China, France, Pakistan and the UK too know this well. Of late, there has been a severe public criticism in the UK against arms sale in the perpetually disturbed regions of the world, including Pakistan and India, to fuel internal conflict and ethnic violence. The UK’s powerful pacifist group believes that Middle East (West Asia) violence has been fuelled by UK arms sales. The USA, France and China could be the biggest beneficiaries of such a movement. The US-Pakistan engagement in Afghanistan has been beneficial even to India, the biggest single development aid provider to the war-ravaged frontier state. India has offered $ 2 billion development aid to Afghanistan. Indian companies are involved in a big way in economic reconstruction of Afghanistan, building infrastructure, roads, bridges, schools, hospitals and dwellings.

Few countries can match China in arms trafficking by its state-owned armament manufacturing enterprises. In fact, the well-oiled Chinese arms trafficking industry spans the whole-world. Jane’s Intelligence Review noted recently the phenomenon of the Chinese arms and missiles smuggling network to various terrorist networks across the world under active coordination by People’s Liberation Army officers operating on behalf of fictitious companies. The Chinese arms trafficking industry is particularly active in Africa, South America, India and Afghanistan. Pakistan too is engaged in arms trafficking. The most popular items of trade among terror outfits are AK-47 assault rifles, LMG and missiles, both shoulder-fired and surface-to-surface.

Thanks to the world-wide increase in the volume of terror trade and the deep US engagement in West Asia, including Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Jordon and the Emirates, and also Afghanistan, Pakistan and Dubai, the US arms sales in 2011 is projected to touch a record $50-billion mark, as against an annual average of $38 billion in 2009 and 2010. The USA has the contract to maintain 10,000-man strong ‘protection force’ in Saudi Arabia. The strength of the US force there may increase three-fold in view of the latest regime-change movement in several Moslem countries in the region. The US arms sale in Afghanistan alone is estimated at $ 20 billion. At the same time, the US arms sales are propping up Pakistan as a regional challenger. Pakistan also procures arms from China. The Pakistani Army too provides regular ‘protection service’ and also ‘protectors-on-call’ facility to several Arab countries. The regional tension, armed conflict in Afghanistan, the deep Pakistani involvement in the Kashmir conflict, its constant arms race with India, growing Pakistan-China engagement, and Maoist and other separatist movements in India provide delightful arms business opportunities, legal or illegal, for the USA, Pakistan and China in the region.

The American ‘war against terror’ is unlikely to be impacted by events such as Osama killing by Obama, ISI’s role in providing shelter to Osama in the Pakistani garrison town, the US violation of Pakistan’s air space and sovereignty and the US judicial indictment of ISI in the 26/11 Mumbai terror plot, etc. The allegations, the counter allegations and the postures made by both the US and Pakistan are more for general public consumption in the two respective countries than of any serious consequence. The business and economic stakes are too high for both the parties in the ‘war against terror.’

The two sides may soon reconcile to their old positions and friendship to keep the great international arms bazaar going, if not thriving. There is no need to read too much into the Osama killing in terms of either the future state of US-Pak relations or possible al Qaeda retaliation across frontiers. For now, the US and Pakistan desperately need each other in mutual interest, strategic as well as economic. To quote one of the last century’s best known political philosopher and statesman, V I Lenin, “there are no morals in politics; there is only expedience. A scoundrel may be useful to us just because he is a scoundrel.” (IPA Service)