India, Pakistan and the liberal theory of world politics: why the world needs a benign hegemon?

 

Marc Grossman, the United States’ special envoy to India and Afghanistan, wound up his trip to Pakistan yesterday. He met with Pakistan’s ostensible face of power, Prime Minister Raja Ashraf and said that,’ Washington was working on a bilateral investment treaty to facilitate US investment in Pakistan and improved market access. He , according to the Dawn newspaper, pitched for a ‘clearly defined relationship’. The Dawn newspaper speculated that the nature of the relationship between India and Pakistan would be defined by co-operation on  counter terrorism, market access , economic opportunities and aiding democracy and civil society in Pakistan. (All are interlinked and correspond to the liberal theory of world politics that goes by the name of ‘complex interdependence’).

 

The backdrop to this is Ambassador Sherry Rehman’s assertions which imply that Pakistan is reviewing its traditional orientation and posture, focusing on normalizing ties with India, and taking advantage of economic opportunities in the region and beyond. Now Pakistan’s foreign minister, Ms. Hina Khar is slated to visit Pakistan in the next few days. Meanwhile , Pakistan’s real power structure is keeping and maintaining a distance from these developments. This may mean that these developments have their tacit approval and support. This is remarkable. A pattern can be inferred from this. This pattern suggests that Pakistan is undergoing structural transformation and this transformation and change is top down; not bottoms up.

 

From a theoretical standpoint and perspective, this corresponds to the liberal theory of world politics rather than the strict realist or neo realist paradigms/perspectives. The subcontinent is making strides towards peace  and amity by being enmeshed into a complex interdependence paradigm. This end point is being goaded and gently pushed by the sole super power which appears to be exercising benign hegemony in the region. This is an unalloyed good for Pakistan. It will enable the country to come out of the self made morass- institutional, economic, political, strategic and geopolitical- and be a normal nation state respected and taken seriously in the halls of power for the right reasons. For India, this means change of behavior and attitude by Pakistan – a recalcitrant and truculent neighbor hostile to India-without taking recourse to coercion and/or war or measures falling short of war. It also means getting rid of the Pakistan millstone around India’s neck and releasing energies that allow India to focus on quotidian concerns.

 

Trade, commerce and capitalism in combination can be an antidote to war and lead to peace and harmony. While it is too soon to sing paeans to the effectiveness and efficacy of complex interdependence or trade and commerce working their magic and leading to peace and harmony, the overall pattern of politics in the subcontinent over the least year or so indicate there is something to it. If complex interdependence or the tentative steps towards complex interdependence is leading to some change in the framework of politics in the subcontinent, the issue is how to deepen and intensify this paradigm in the subcontinent?

 

The key lies with the United States and the nature of its engagement with Pakistan. Till now, the United States has displayed remarkable patience with Pakistan. Be it the aftermath of the September II attacks, wherein Pakistan’s security establishment was indirectly implicated in the attacks, the double games Pakistan has played or the shielding of Osama bin Laden, the United States has demonstrated patience and prudence in dealing with Pakistan. Whilst this has helped prevent the sliding of Pakistan –United States relationship into comprehensive estrangement, this is not the end of the game.

 

 

The real challenge is altering the nature and the attendant orientation of Pakistan into a salubrious entity at peace with itself and the world. This will require astute, prudent and sagacious diplomacy wherein the carrot has precedence over the stick. Inducements, engagement-economic, political and strategic- , encouragement to moderate forces are the name of the game here. It is complex interdependence or enmeshing the region into complex interdependence that may do the trick. And it is to this that the United States is focusing on. Till now, the United State’s approach cannot be faulted. It is performing the delicate dance with Pakistan very well. It is hoped that the country continues on this path and not derailed either by domestic politics, a terrorist outrage, or some other event.

 

 All this then underscores the need of/for a benign hegemon. Left to their own devices, states , operating in an anarchic world, are prone to war, strife and conflict. The superstructure of international organizations meant to obviate these problems is not up to the task and cannot realistically cope up with the myriad problems of world order and peace. And there is no alternative to the United States. The role for being the guarantor of peace and stability in the world falls on the United States both by design and default and it is perhaps the national interest of the United States to conform to this role. It is precisely a combination of interest and benign hegemony that is at work and play in the politics of the subcontinent. If it leads to peace within and without, let the United States continue to stick to this path and status. The peoples of the world need it. Abdication of this role would be bad for the United States, the world and world order. The nation is indeed indispensable. In the mean time, the United States should continue to goad and nudge Pakistan from its self inflicted morass. It will be good and salubrious for the subcontinent in particular and the world at large.