FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

La Jornada Interview

by La Jornada

Q.: How would you characterize the current conflict? Is it a “clash of civilizations”, a “New Holy War”, a national liberation struggle, a conflict between the Arab oil elite and the dollar elite, or none of the above?

Tariq Ali: None of the above. It is a crude war of revenge. A powerful animal temporarily blinded, by a bee sting, lashes out in a crazy way. This is exactly what is happening. The United States and Blair, their military confederate in Britain, had no clear idea of what they were doing. They assumed that the Taliban would crumble within a week or two. They were wrong. They hoped that Pakistan, which had created the Taliban, might be able to split them, but instead the Taliban split the Pakistan Army. Two Generals had to be sacked by Gen. Musharraf. The former King of Afghanistan continues to cool his heels in Rome. The Northern Alliance can’t take Kabul without US ground troops. If these are sent there will be losses. Ultimately of course the West could capture the cities, cut the Taliban supply lines and seal them off from Pakistan. Difficult, but not impossible. However it can’t be done without troops. Perhaps the US could throw German, Italian and British soldiers on the ground while they continue to fight from the air. Then the Europeans could take the casualties. Whatever happens the end-result will be more chaos, not less. More terrorism, not less. Meanwhile the United States continues to B52 the poorest country in the world. There are already heavy civilian casualties.

Q.: What would you say is at stake in this war? What is the center of the dispute: access to gas and water in the Middle East, establishment of hegemony in the Islamic world, assuring a permanent U.S. presence in the region, or none of the above?

Tariq Ali: I really don’t believe that this war was begun for economic gain. We, on the left, are always quick to look for the economic reasons and usually we’re right, but not this time. I think the war was basically a response to domestic pressure after the events of September 11. There were choices to be made. The US could have decided to treat this for what it was: a criminal act and not an act of war. They chose war. Obviously they will use it to strengthen and assert US global hegemony on all three fronts: political, military and economic, but first they have to get out of the situation they’re in.

Q.: How would you explain the emergence of Islamic fundamentalism, or what other authors have called “political Islam”?

Tariq Ali: The seeds of Islamism were sown by the United States during the Cold War. From the 50s to the 90s of the last century they supported the bulwark of religion against the Communist enemy. When the Cold War ended the groups they had supported began to get restless. They’re funding and, in some cases, arms supplies had been cut off. Then came the Gulf War or the Second Oil War as I call it. Most of the Islamists chose this moment to break definitively with the West and garbed themselves in nationalist clothes. All over the world there is a big vacuum. In the Arab world this vacuum is the loss of both radical nationalism and communism. The Islamists consciously chose to fill the vacuum. In Algeria, Egypt and Pakistan, a number of important ex-Maoist leaders converted to Islam. From Mao to Allah was not as big a jump as you might think! The people denied secular openings began to respond. The West doesn’t like to think about this seriously, but Osama has become a cult figure and not just in the Muslim world. When people feel disempowered, bitter, and angry and when traditional politicians are interchangeable in the sense that they are all in the service of market fundamentalism, then a sensational deed like September 11 has a very big impact.

Q.: How would you assess the risk that the current conflict could destabilize Pakistan? Could this situation lead to a greater presence of radical Islam in that country’s secret service and military forces?

Tariq Ali: Yes. In Pakistan the religious fundamentalism was state-sponsored. It started in a big way during the years of the Zia dictatorship (1977-89). Its aim was to marginalize secular politics and destroy all radical alternatives. But this also made the fundamentalists very unpopular. In three general elections that followed the death of Zia, the religious parties got under 4 percent of the vote….less than they get in Israel. Rejected by the people they decided to infiltrate the state apparatus. Their exact strength is unquantifiable at the moment, but they have cells in the Army and at every level. They are clever. They will not strike till they are sure of victory. The events in Afghanistan are playing into their hands.

Q.: What consequences do you predict of the current conflict? What scenarios do you see for the future?

Tariq Ali: As I said above, the West could take Afghanistan and hand it over to people they favor. I don’t believe in the ‘invincibility’ of Afghanistan. The main reason the Russians were defeated was because the religious groups, not to mention Osama and his gang, were backed to the hilt by the United States. Pakistan was the proxy they used to ensure the defeat of Moscow. Without US weaponry, money, food, bribes the Russians could have held on. So if Pakistan is persuaded to cut off the Taliban they could be isolated and defeated militarily. But what then? Since the West organized the defeat of all secular forces in the country, there is very little left in the way of a democratic base of any sort. So there will be continuos trouble. Who will police the new state? Pakistan? Iran? India? Russia? All of them? Or a semi-permanent NATO-protectorate with Turkish troops? To pose these questions is to show that the US is really in a no-win situation. And the cassus belli of this war, Osama Bin Laden? Where is he? Will he be found? If not what will they do? I think the war is reaching a critical point. The snow will start falling on the Pamir mountains very soon, making ground war virtually impossible. Then what? Tactical nuclear weapons? The US population and Blair might support their use, but I think it would split the EU and enrage the rest of the world. Meanwhile we observe and analyze. CP

Tariq Ali, a frequent CounterPunch contributor, is the author of The Stone Woman.

Tariq Ali is the author of The Obama Syndrome (Verso).

More articles by:

CounterPunch Magazine

minimag-edit

August 29, 2016
Eric Draitser
Hillary and the Clinton Foundation: Exemplars of America’s Political Rot
Patrick Timmons
Dildos on Campus, Gun in the Library: the New York Times and the Texas Gun War
Jack Rasmus
Bernie Sanders ‘OR’ Revolution: a Statement or a Question?
Richard Moser
Strategic Choreography and Inside/Outside Organizers
Nigel Clarke
President Obama’s “Now Watch This Drive” Moment
Robert Fisk
Iraq’s Willing Executioners
Wahid Azal
The Banality of Evil and the Ivory Tower Masterminds of the 1953 Coup d’Etat in Iran
Farzana Versey
Romancing the Activist
Frances Madeson
Meet the Geronimos: Apache Leader’s Descendants Talk About Living With the Legacy
Nauman Sadiq
The War on Terror and the Carter Doctrine
Lawrence Wittner
Does the Democratic Party Have a Progressive Platform–and Does It Matter?
Marjorie Cohn
Death to the Death Penalty in California
Winslow Myers
Asking the Right Questions
Rivera Sun
The Sane Candidate: Which Representatives Will End the Endless Wars?
Linn Washington Jr.
Philadelphia District Attorney Hammered for Hypocrisy
Binoy Kampmark
Banning Burkinis: the Politics of Beachwear
Weekend Edition
August 26, 2016
Friday - Sunday
Louisa Willcox
The Unbearable Killing of Yellowstone’s Grizzlies: 2015 Shatters Records for Bear Deaths
Paul Buhle
In the Shadow of the CIA: Liberalism’s Big Embarrassing Moment
Rob Urie
Crisis and Opportunity
Charles Pierson
Wedding Crashers Who Kill
Richard Moser
What is the Inside/Outside Strategy?
Dirk Bezemer – Michael Hudson
Finance is Not the Economy
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Bernie’s Used Cars
Margaret Kimberley
Hillary and Colin: the War Criminal Charade
Patrick Cockburn
Turkey’s Foray into Syria: a Gamble in a Very Dangerous Game
Ishmael Reed
Birther Tries to Flim Flam Blacks  
Brian Terrell
What Makes a Hate Group?
Andrew Levine
How Donald Trump Can Still be a Hero: Force the Guardians of the Duopoly to Open Up the Debates
Howard Lisnoff
Trouble in Political Paradise
Terry Tempest Williams
Will Our National Parks Survive the Next 100 Years?
Ben Debney
The Swimsuit that Overthrew the State
Ashley Smith
Anti-imperialism and the Syrian Revolution
Andrew Stewart
Did Gore Throw the 2000 Election?
Vincent Navarro
Is the Nation State and Its Welfare State Dead? a Critique of Varoufakis
John Wight
Syria’s Kurds and the Wages of Treachery
Lawrence Davidson
The New Anti-Semitism: the Case of Joy Karega
Mateo Pimentel
The Affordable Care Act: A Litmus Test for American Capitalism?
Roger Annis
In Northern Syria, Turkey Opens New Front in its War Against the Kurds
David Swanson
ABC Shifts Blame from US Wars to Doctors Without Borders
Norman Pollack
American Exceptionalism: A Pernicious Doctrine
Ralph Nader
Readers Think, Thinkers Read
Julia Morris
The Mythologies of the Nauruan Refugee Nation
George Wuerthner
Caving to Ranchers: the Misguided Decision to Kill the Profanity Wolf Pack
Ann Garrison
Unworthy Victims: Houthis and Hutus
Julian Vigo
Britain’s Slavery Legacy
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail