By M.R. Josse
NEW YORK, NY: The week just over has been very productive as far as spawning far-reaching events/developments is concerned. Such a claim can be advanced whether mulling recent happenings vis-à-vis American policies or assessing the latest moves in Nepali geopolitics.
OUTLANDISH
I would single out a bunch of events/issues that have occupied front and centre stage in the public domain in America, beginning with the stunning sacking by President Donald Trump of John Bolton, his hawkish third national security adviser.
The general consensus is that Bolton’s abrupt exit was that Trump could no longer stomach continued serious policy differences with him over Iran, North Korea and Afghanistan. Remember: while Trump campaigned on withdrawing the U.S from “endless wars”, Bolton embraced an aggressive interventionist policy agenda from the word go.
Their views collided most violently over Afghanistan, as Trump invited the Taliban for negotiations at Camp David to end America’s 18-year war – before abruptly scrubbing it.
One not only wondered why Trump offered Bolton such a vital responsibility for so long but also why Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is still around, nice and comfy, given that he shares much of Bolton’s hard-hitting views on foreign/security policy!
Incidentally, as this is being penned, Iran has dismissed the U.S. claim that it was behind Saudi oil strikes, declaring that it is even prepared for war and warning that American bases and aircraft carriers in the region were in range of its missiles. Yemen’s Houthi group claimed responsibility for the September 14th drone attack that knocked out more than half of the Saudi output, or more than 5% of global supply.
(To me, however, it is simply not credible that the Houthi’s, on their own, could have delivered such a walloping strategic blow on Saudi Arabia; I would wager they were assisted by their Iranian sponsors.)
Recalling Trump’s recent agreement to negotiate with Iran’s President Hassan Rouhani many may conclude that Bolton was dead-right in recommending, all along, a hard-line policy vis-à-vis Iran.
GUNFIGHT AT OK CORRAL
The other noteworthy event pertains to the recent debate in Houston, Texas among 10 Democratic contenders for party nomination for the 2020 presidential elections.
As far as I could make out, the debaters were dangerously polarized into ‘moderates’ and ‘progressives’, with former vice president Joe Biden falling into the former category and Senators Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders – the other two top contenders – in the latter.
While such a fundamental division, in my book, is hardly a happy omen for the Democrats, that for much of the time the verbal to-and-fro was not only raucous but even got pretty personal can hardly be much more reassuring – except perhaps for Trump.
Predictably, the focus of much of the debate’s attention was Biden – which speaks for itself as far as the centrality of his candidacy goes. Curiously, many of the political hopefuls sang paeans to former president Barrack Obama which, unwittingly, reminded one and all that Biden had been Obama’s loyal partner for eight full years. Ordinarily, that should translate into a plus for Biden; in today’s dog-eat-dog political clime in the Democratic camp, who can tell?
Anyway, though it is true that Biden, under attack from all sides, sometimes fumbled on details and memory, he more or less not just stood his ground but maintained a dignified, presidential mien throughout. In any case, though I still maintain that it is far too early in the game to get into a prediction mode, I doubt that voters are less concerned about which candidate is best equipped to defeat Trump in the hustings than focused on their debating skills. Trump had every reason, methinks, to be as pleased as Punch.
INDO-PACIFIC AND MORE
Last week, I had drawn attention to observations of a Wall Street Journal columnist on the emerging Indo-Pacific strategic doctrine, assiduously pushed by the U.S. – and, behind the scenes, by India – to scuttle China’s rise.
I was therefore most fascinated to read, a few days ago, a very strong anti-U.S. statement by Prachanda issued on the heels of an official visit to Nepal of Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi.
In essence, Prachanda’s verbal offensive took the form of a frontal broadside against America’s Indo-Pacific foreign/security policy. In essence, it declared that Nepal has not, and would not, support any endeavour in any form to undermine China; neither would Nepal, which currently enjoys – and has virtually always had, an excellent relationship with Beijing – go along with any stratagem to contain China.
Apart from the fact that the statement came almost on the heels of Wang’s visit, if news reports from Kathmandu are anything to go by, it was timed, significantly enough, just weeks before the much anticipated official visit of Chinese President Xi Jinping to Nepal.
Recall that during Foreign Minister Pradeep Gyawali’s official visit to the United States months ago, there was total confusion whether Kathmandu went along with the stated desire of the U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to include Nepal in her evolving anti-Chinese politico-diplomatic maneuver.
Subsequently, however, after scalding criticism, Kathmandu finally came around to clarifying that she was not endorsing such a strategic game plan for the Asia-Pacific, no matter that the Asia-Pacific region was re-named the Indo-Pacific, which is plainly suggestive of a conjoining of American and Indian strategic interest.
To my mind, what is most puzzling is how Pompeo could have expected Nepal to have plunged headlong into the Indo-Pacific trap, given not only Nepal’s vulnerable position on Tibet’s southern flank but also the long and cordial history of Sino-Nepalese relations.
That aside, how could anyone have ignored the fraught relations generally subsisting between Kathmandu and India given the latter’s propensity to act as the regional hegemon?
That was graphically underscored when India refused to support Nepal’s Zone of Peace proposal of the 1970s, despite that the fact that 110 governments had done so!
Login to add a comment