Shatranj ke Khiladi

The international political scene is changing rapidly and the centre of political gravity is moving towards South Asia. The karta-dhartas of the world believe that they have made sufficient progress in Iraq and that they can now think of choosing their next target. So far, all signs point to Tehran, right at the doorstops of South Asia. The new Great Game has begun! It is in this light that one should view Musharraf’s visit to India and the preceding visits to South Asia of the Chinese premier Wen Jiabao and the US secretaries of State and Defense. This brief survey looks at the major and minor players in this Great Game, their stakes in it and the potential moves and counter-moves they can make.

The prime mover in this Game is the United States of America. It is, and wants to remain, the unchallenged sole arbiter of the world but is willing to have short and medium term alliances to remain at top. It wants to attack Iran’s nuclear installations and help engineer a regime change there. To do so, it needs allies and wants Pakistan to extend its support in “war against terror” to its war against nuclear proliferation. Pakistan, however, is of limited use to the U.S in its strategic plans to encircle China, at least for now, as Pakistan prides itself to be China’s all-weather friend. Even if Pakistan wants, it does not have the potential to be a counter to China. So, the U.S wants to look towards India for its objective of containing China.

The sole potential rival to the U.S in the region is China which seems to be growing like Incredible Hulk every year. It already wields tremendous economic clout and when it will sneeze, Wall Street will have penumonia. It has thrown challenge to the U.S by explicitly raising the possibility of using force to takeover Taiwan and has also thrown challenge to Japan by drilling for oil and gas in the disputed waters of China Sea. Left unchecked, it would be in a position to checkmate the U.S everywhere in Asia, if not in the world, in the not-so-distant future. Unlike the U.S, it does not have any current ambitions to dominate the world but the Middle Kingdom does want to be the hedgemon in Asia and seeks once again to have the obeisance of its neighbours that it once commanded. It seeks to keep its US rival, who currently has more pawns, engaged until it has enough pawns of its own to be able to checkmate the U.S. It is a patient long-term player making slow but deliberate moves. At present it does not have any pawns it can solidly claim as its own. Pakistan has been a long-term supporter and likes it more than it likes its Rival; at the same time China is not, at the present time, able to give Pakistan what it wants or needs and, if forced to choose between the two, Pakistan will most likely take the painful decision to go with the U.S. Iran seems to be a more natural ally of China in the emerging moves of its Rival; it can also provide the much needed energy supplies for which China seems to have an unending appetite. It has to keep a wary eye on India, a one-time ally as well as enemy and potentially a rival and an ally again.

Afghanistan is in the unfortunate position of a fiercely independent player forced into the role of a pawn changing hands. It was the great prize in the original Great Game but survived with its pride and independence in tact. During the Cold War era, it was a pawn most of the time of the Soviet Union. The Americans checkmated the Soviets with the help of Pakistan and handed over the prize to that country in recognition of services rendered. It remained a pawn of Pakistan until the bombing of two skyscrapers in the distant New York by suicide bombers with suspected ties to fugitives in Afghanistan, brought the wrath of America upon it. Pakistan, in a quick summersault, abandoned its pawn, which is now securely in the American possession.

Iran has refused to be anyone’s pawn and insists on being a player in the Middle East. It has its allies all over the Middle East and is fervently hoping to snatch Iraq from America’s tenuous possession. It keeps a wary eye on its neighbour Pakistan, despite occasional profession of brotherly love by both sides. Iran knows that, in a crunch, Pakistan would ditch it faster than it did Afghanistan. So, it looks to India and China for more dependable allies.

Pakistan is both a pawn and a player. It’s a pawn in the Big Game, and that too in the hands of the player it does not love, the US. It is constrained to accept the position of being a pawn of an unloved player because it aspires to be an equal player against a much bigger neighbour in the mini-game with the elusive prize of Kashmir. It was able to checkmate its enmy in the Cold War era by its alliance with the stronger and winning player in that War. Fortunes really smiled at it when it was able to play a crucial role in bringing together two of the players in the Cold War, China and the U.S. However, it found to its dismay that the winner of the Cold War does not have a concept of two-way friendship and loyalty; it is quite willing to pay for services rendered as long as those services are required, without any long term commitment.

This brings us to India. India is a regional player with an ambition that far outstrips its current reach. It considers itself to be the proud forbearer of an ancient civilization and believes that this, along with its size, entitles it to be a major player on the world stage. For a while, it tried to do so by seeking a high moral ground in the Cold War by becoming the leader of an international non-alignment movement, without any economic or military might to back it up. This policy prevented it from being in the camp which was most in a position to help it and willy-nilly led it to be a somewhat passive ally of the losing side in the Cold War. Its leadership received a big blow when its friend and neighbour China, inflicted a crushing defeat on it to confront it with the cold reality that no one respects a weakling giving high moral sermons. Since then, it has been building its military strength to the point where it now is one of the major supporters of international arms merchants, besides having a substantial indigenous defence industry. The post Cold War era presented India with new opportunities, which it has grabbed. It has also been able to put its economic house in order to some extent and on a growth path. The world too has begun to notice its strength in certain areas and its potential in others.

This has revived India’s ambition to be a significant player on the world stage, starting with its quest for a seat at the UN Security Council. India is in a strategic location and has the wherewithal to be a valuable piece in the American plan to contain China’s ambition to be the unchallenged hedgemon in Asia. This is why the Americans are wooing it assiduously. China has also reluctantly come to the conclusion that India may be coming out of its slumber. It wants to exploit India’s reluctance to see America as the sole superpower and has shown willingness to resolve its longstanding border dispute with India to concentrate on building a strong trading relationship. For a long time, it wanted to keep India tied down in South Asia by supporting its rival sibling. It would now like to see that rivalry end so that the siblings have less reason to be dependent upon its long-term rival. Ironically, its rival will also like nothing better than for the siblings to end their long enmity, as this would help reduce the support for Islamists in Pakistan and help it become, like Turkey, a showcase moderate Muslim state.

So, where does it leave India and Pakistan? They are at a critical juncture where they have to decide whether they want to be pawns or players. If they keep their sibling rivalry, Pakistan will never be able to be anything but a pawn, either of America or of China or of both. India may have a somewhat bigger room for manoeuvre but it too cannot be a full player in the international arena as long as it is tied down by its enmity with Pakistan. If this sibling rivalry is replaced by sibling partnership, India can aspire to deal with China and the US as a player rather than a pawn. If Pakistan is released from this sibling hostility, it can do what it has always aspired and is capable of, namely, to assume the leadership of the large crescent of countries from Morocco to Afghanistan, including the erstwhile Soviet republics.

If India and Pakistan want to be players and not pawns, they should look beyond Confidence Building Measures, even beyond Kashmir, and start thinking strategically of the roles they can play, individually and as a team, in the world twenty years from now.