Category: Uncategorized

When it comes to trading with Iran, Pakistan must tell America to go to hell

by Mirrors For The PrinceUncategorized1 Comment on When it comes to trading with Iran, Pakistan must tell America to go to hell

This essay was first published here, by the Friday Times on April 3rd, 2024.

Pakistan’s government recently announced its intention to seek a waiver from the sanctions America imposes on nations that trade with Iran so it can finally complete the long-delayed Peace Pipeline between both countries. Which is a fancy way of saying it is asking America for permission. Sadly, the US has signaled it will not agree, dashing the government’s hopes.

This project is designed to supply Pakistan with 750 million cubic feet of natural gas a day. This would allow it to generate 5,000 megawatts of power for Pakistan’s energy starved cities and factories. Not only would completing this pipeline significantly enhance Pakistan’s energy security, it would also further improve connectivity with Iran, which is vital to Pakistan’s interests for a variety of reasons.

As the author has argued many times, creating a free trade zone and security organization similar to NATO between Pakistan, Iran, and Turkey represents the best long term plan to improve each nation’s geopolitical and economic positions. Doing so would create a large internal market comprised of over 400 million people while significantly improving their national security situations. At the least, connecting to Iran is an important prerequisite if Pakistan ever hopes to substantially increase trade with Turkey, a key ally. As such, for both economic and military reasons, building infrastructure with Iran is vital to Pakistan’s long term national interests.

The fact that Pakistan’s leaders must beg America for permission or, as Pakistani President Asif Zardari suggested in the face of America’s opposition, resort to medieval forms of barter trade to pursue policies that are so important to its interests is both embarrassing and infuriating. It also provides yet another example of how incredibly weak and subservient Pakistan still is to the Western powers. Instead of taking orders from colonial rulers in London, Pakistan’s leaders must now obey neo-colonial masters in Washington DC.

Despite what America’s imperial overlords may think, they have no right to decide who Pakistan can trade with just as Pakistan has no right to decide which nations America can trade with. Unfortunately, despite gaining its independence nearly 80 years ago, Pakistan is still too weak to be the master of its own fate.

Pakistan’s servility is a by-product of its authoritarian political institutions and lack of democracy. This has led to the creation of a political economy designed to serve the narrow interests of its elite rather than empower the masses. As a result, Pakistan’s government has proven incapable of building an economy and technological base that would allow it to act as a truly independent nation.

Of course, Pakistan is a microcosm of the wider Muslim world, which is also incredibly weak for much the same reasons. Nearly every Muslim nation is ruled by tyrants who secure their power through violence instead of the consent of their people. This has made them too weak and unstable to effectively challenge America’s domination of their lands.

Instead of seeking America’s approval, Pakistan and the entire Muslim world should be working together to oppose its hegemonic policies. Between its unequivocal support for apartheid Israel, the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan and its massive weapons sales to the region’s many dictators, America has the blood of millions of Muslims on its hands. The massacre it is currently enabling in Gaza is only its most recent crime and pales in comparison to the 576,000 children it starved to death in Iraq, the estimated 4.5 million souls who died because of its supposed “War on Terror,” or the 377,000 Yemeni civilians it helped Saudi Arabia murder.

This pattern of violence and domination will never end until Muslims take the steps needed to end it. Part of that process must entail building stronger connections to each other. By obeying America’s orders and refusing to develop close ties with Iran, Pakistan’s leaders are helping to perpetuate its control of the region.

America will not allow Pakistan to trade with Iran because it refuses to accept America’s violent control and subjugation of the Muslim world. Due to its anti-imperial policies, Iran is the only country that has meaningfully tried to help the Palestinians by giving them the means to defend themselves against Israel’s genocidal violence. It also refuses to allow the West to control its natural resources. For these “crimes,” it has been isolated and attacked.

Unity between Muslims, by itself, will not be enough to end America’s dominance. But it is an important facet of the multi-pronged approach Muslims must take if they wish to destroy the neo-colonial power structures that have ensnared them since the end of the colonial era. The most important step towards that end would be creating democratic political institutions based on the rule of law that guarantee freedom of expression and religion for all citizens.

That is the most logical way to stimulate the sort of economic and technological development that could finally free the Muslim world. But building infrastructure and new economic institutions that do not depend on the US dollar to facilitate trade between Muslim nations would also be vitally important. Which is why, when it comes to completing the Peace Pipeline, the best thing Pakistan’s leaders can do is tell America and its imperial pretensions to go to hell.

Tagged : / / / / / / / /

Rather than help Gaza, Iran and Pakistan prefer to attack each other

by Mirrors For The PrinceUncategorized4 Comments on Rather than help Gaza, Iran and Pakistan prefer to attack each other

This essay was first published here, by the Friday Times on Jan. 23, 2024.

Israel’s rampage through Gaza has left an unprecedented swath of destruction in its wake. Its military has now murdered at least 24,762 Palestinians, including 9,600 children. 85% of Gaza’s people have been displaced while a third of its buildings have been destroyed, leaving roughly half a million Palestinians homeless. Due to this destruction and Israel’s continuing blockade, 576,000 Gazans face the very real prospect of starving to death this winter. In the words of one analyst, Israel is waging a war of “extermination” against the Palestinians, one its leaders have promised to continue without mercy or reprieve regardless of the international outcry.

It was obvious at the outset of this war that the Muslim world is too weak to help the Palestinians and would therefore be forced to impotently watch this massacre unfold. The recent hostilities between Pakistan and Iran show exactly why. In fact, it is hard to conceive of a better example to illustrate the dysfunction that has gripped Muslim societies for centuries. Instead of working together to stop Israel’s brutal assault, these two Muslim nations reacted to its outrages by attacking each other.  

Iran’s decision to attack Pakistan had little to do with animosity towards its neighbor and everything to do with the war in Gaza and its long confrontation with America and the West. It has been locked in conflict with the Western alliance since its religious elite deposed the Shah and took power in 1979. Since that time, it has adopted an anti-imperial agenda predicated on challenging Western domination of the Muslim world. To that end, its leaders have invested in improving their technological abilities so they can design and build the weapons needed to protect themselves. They have also provided money, training, weapons and diplomatic support to the Palestinians as well as like-minded allies throughout the region. As a result, Iran is the only Muslim nation to openly defy the West.

For these crimes, it has been forced to endure brutal economic sanctions, its government officials are routinely assassinated, and even the ceremonies commemorating these fallen leaders are subject to attack. The Western bloc has also used its coercive powers to prevent other Muslim states from developing close relations with it, which is why it has been forced to develop alliances with mostly non-state actors.

Given these dynamics, Iran’s desire to defend itself is understandable. Its decision to target other Muslim nations is not. Iran’s volley was part of a three-pronged attack that also targeted Iraq and Syria. These targets and the means used to attack them were intended to deter Israel by showing off its robust missile capabilities. While its attacks certainly showed what its missiles are capable of, they are best viewed as an admission that, despite having ample justification, Iran does not possess the power to directly attack its enemies. Iran’s leaders were forced to vent their frustrations on their Muslim neighbors precisely because they knew an attack on Israeli or American targets would lead to a violent and unpredictable reprisal.

This episode also shows that talk of an axis of resistance is mostly bluster. Israel and America are happy to exaggerate the threat posed by Iran and its allies since it provides a convenient excuse for their aggressive policies. But despite their tough talk and impressive arsenal of rockets and missiles, they were powerless to stop the massacre in Gaza. Hezbollah and the Houthis have done their best to dissuade Israel from its current course, but their efforts have done little to lower the body count. Neither Iran nor its allies have been willing to fully commit to the fight because they do not have the means to protect themselves from the combined might of Israel and its Western backers. Thus, they have been unwilling to escalate their attacks beyond a limited threshold.

Iran’s leaders deserve praise for their willingness to stand up to the genocidal policies and racist hypocrisy of the West, but they also deserve a great deal of criticism. Their inability to effectively help the Palestinians is rooted in the authoritarian political system they have built to oppress their people. As explained previously, democratic systems are the best at allowing a nation to develop the technological and economic abilities needed to build powerful militaries in the modern age. By refusing to acknowledge this obvious truth, Iran has been fighting America and Israel with one hand tied behind its back. The ease with which Israel’s Mossad intelligence agency operates inside Iran and the massive protests that have rocked it since 2009 are the natural result of this oppression. One does not need to be Sun Tzu to realize that alienating your own people while locked in a confrontation with foes as powerful and ruthless as America and Israel is not a smart strategy. But that is the path its rulers have chosen.

Iran’s leaders have clearly made mistakes in their quest to help the Palestinians, but at least they are doing something. The same cannot be said for the rest of the Muslim world. The leaders of Pakistan and Turkey, for example, have repeatedly expressed their outrage at Israel’s atrocities but taken no actions to stop them. Despite possessing stronger militaries than Iran’s in many ways, both are fundamentally more constrained in their freedom of action because of their dependence on America for some of their most advanced weapons and their desire to remain part of an international trading system that runs on the US dollar. Neither can defy America’s wishes out of fear it may cut off their supply of weapons or torpedo their economies with the same sort of sanctions it has levied against Iran.

Based on these factors and their unwillingness to upset their Arab patrons, Pakistan’s leaders have refused to build closer relations with Iran. As usual, they are prioritizing short-term needs while ignoring the bigger picture. America’s history of violence in the Muslim world, its unequivocal support for apartheid Israel and its growing relationship with India’s extremist government show it is a threat to Muslims everywhere. This threat will only grow during the next few decades.

America’s political system is broken but its leaders are too busy printing money to pay for their massive military to notice. This has led to $34 trillion in sovereign debt. The interest payments required to service this debt are growing by the day. It spent $659 billion on interest payments this past year and this figure is expected to grow to $2 trillion by the end of the decade. When the financial house of cards America built to pay for its imperial ambitions finally implodes, the dollar will be worthless. Those nations that have tied their economies and currencies to it will find themselves impoverished and their central banks filled with piles of worthless green paper. The sooner Muslims build an economic system that is no longer ruled by the dollar, the better off they will be.

The simple truth is that Pakistan and Iran need each other. Both will need to protect themselves from the chaos that is sure to accompany America’s decline. Both have a moral obligation to help the Palestinians, and of course, there is the need to secure the sparsely populated and lawless border areas that sparked this controversy. These have often been used as a base for those opposed to being ruled by elites in Tehran or Islamabad. It is in the interest of both nations to secure this area. The most logical way to do that is to work together. Instead of using missiles or airstrikes, the camps that prompted these attacks should have been destroyed via a joint operation involving troops from both militaries. The fact that these neighbors have not developed the means to conduct such operations is an indictment of both their leaders. This entire fiasco could have served as the perfect springboard to further enhance Pakistan’s and Iran’s ability to cooperate with each other. Instead, it proved why Gaza has been forced to suffer on its own and why Muslims have been so weak for so long.  

Tagged : / / / / / / / / /

Why I hate talking about Israel and Palestine

by Mirrors For The PrinceUncategorizedLeave a Comment on Why I hate talking about Israel and Palestine

This essay was first published here, by the Friday Times on Dec. 30, 2023.

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is not terribly complicated. The difficulty in talking about this subject has nothing to do with its complexities and everything to do with the racism and gaslighting that dominates the conversation. Those who express pro-Palestinian sentiments are accused of being antisemitic, terrorist sympathizers, or Hamas apologists and face the very real prospect of losing their jobs or being expelled from their schools. Just last week, an Arab-American teacher in Florida was fired from her job while her son was expelled from school on the basis that her comments on social media highlighting the staggering number of women and children murdered by Israel’s military were “hateful and incendiary.” To be clear, she did not praise Hamas or try to rationalize its violence. Her only crime was speaking out against a massacre.

The vitriol directed towards those advocating on behalf of Palestinians is enough, by itself, to prevent reasoned debate or silence those who would speak for Gaza’s children. But when the blatant gaslighting that has always surrounded this topic is added to the mix, things that should be easy, like agreeing on basic facts become impossible. For example, despite an abundance of clear and overwhelming evidence, many Americans refuse to admit Israel is an apartheid state. Instead, they ignore or castigate the conclusions of human rights organizations like Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and B’tselem that have all described it as one. Even the former head of Israel’s Mossad intelligence service, Tamir Pardo, was vilified then ignored for finally admitting the truth.

Many Americans, like David Ignatius, seem incapable of even using the word apartheid. Mr. Ignatius recently wrote a lengthy article chronicling what he described as “a pattern of Israeli domination and occasional abuse that makes daily life a humiliation for many Palestinians.” He discussed a laundry list of systemic and institutionalized practices, like the different colored license plates issued to Jewish settlers in the West Bank that allow them to bypass the IDF’s numerous checkpoints and the impunity with which they can attack Palestinians or destroy their property. Curiously, he never once used the word apartheid to describe these policies. Like many American pundits, Mr. Ignatius knows admitting the obvious truth that Israel is an apartheid state would fundamentally change the nature of this debate by making their support for it morally indefensible. Thus, most refuse to do so even when the ugly reality is staring them in the face.  

Unfortunately for its supporters, no amount of willful ignorance can obscure that Israel is, in fact, an apartheid state. The best way to show how is to start by defining the term. Apartheid was originally used to describe South Africa’s political system, which institutionalized the segregation of blacks and whites while violently discriminating against and marginalizing the black majority. It has since evolved into a shorthand way of describing any political system designed to disenfranchise or marginalize people based on their religion, race, or ethnicity. Based on this definition, America during the Jim Crow era was also an apartheid state. That segregation was officially limited to the south, affording African Americans in the north slightly more rights, does not change this fact. Similarly, the greater freedoms granted Arabs living in Israel Proper versus those in the West Bank does not absolve Israel of its guilt.

As Mr. Ignatius’ piece so poignantly illustrates, Israel is the governing authority in the West Bank in all but name. It has been since 1967. Its 56-year occupation and creeping colonization of this territory, and the different set of rules governing Jews and Arabs within it, has turned it into an apartheid state. Which means, by definition, Israel cannot be a democracy since it is impossible to be one while simultaneously maintaining a violent military occupation designed to subjugate and disenfranchise millions of people based on their ethnicity. It should be obvious that being a democracy and military occupier are mutually exclusive but the degree of gaslighting infused into this conversation prevents many Americans from admitting this self-evident truth. Instead, America’s leaders prefer to pretend the two-state solution is still viable and Israel has not already annexed the West Bank. This allows them to mask their guilt by talking about non-existent political processes rather than substantively addressing the oppression of the Palestinians.

When people will not even admit to basic facts, it becomes impossible to discuss more complicated issues, like whether Israel’s military is intentionally murdering civilians. Here, the fog of war makes knowing all the facts impossible. However, a pattern has begun to emerge that deserves greater scrutiny. Since the start of this war, Israel’s forces have murdered three hostages waving white flags as they tried to surrender who were clearly mis-identified as Palestinians, a good samaritan who intervened to stop a terrorist attack as he was kneeling and raising his hands who was also mistaken for an Arab, a mother and daughter sheltering in a church, a poet whose greatest offense appears to be sending insensitive tweets about the country bombing his home, 42 members of a single family as they huddled together in their home, an adorable three year old child named Reem, and an unprecedented number of journalists. In total, the IDF has slaughtered over 20,000 people. 70% of whom were women or children like Reem.

There have also been numerous videos showing IDF troops acting abhorrently as they desecrate places of worship, loot shops, or wantonly destroy property. One even showed them attacking an unarmed man, who was not being violent in any way. The sheer number of egregious incidents point to a pattern of abuse that makes recent reports of Israeli forces summarily executing unarmed civilians depressingly credible. Taken together, these examples suggest Israel’s soldiers are acting with the blessings, either implicit or explicit, of their superiors as they maliciously and intentionally murder civilians. The only other plausible explanations are that the IDF is suffering from systemic and widespread discipline issues, or its troops are incompetent and, as a result, keep accidentally attacking and killing civilians. Given its widely acknowledged reputation as a well-trained force, these seem highly unlikely.

Rather than have a difficult conversation about these crimes and America’s role in enabling them, we are confronted with more gaslighting and racism. In America, people like Florida state rep. Michelle Salzman who suggested the IDF should kill “all” Palestinians or Congressman Brian Mast who refused to distinguish between Hamas and Palestinian civilians shield Israel from criticism by shaping the debate to blame and dehumanize the victims. Absurd comparisons to the Nazis are made, past atrocities like dropping atomic bombs on cities full of emaciated women and children are cited as justification, and no one bats an eye.

Many even argue Hamas is solely to blame for Gaza’s dead. Under this line of reasoning, the men pulling the triggers or dropping the bombs bear no responsibility whatsoever for their actions. Hamas, as the catalyst, must shoulder it all. An interesting argument that would probably appeal to Hamas’ leaders more than anyone else since they could easily point to the obscene number of Palestinian children Israel has murdered over the years as justification for their crimes. Of course, holding Hamas and Israel to the same standards would make me a “terrorist sympathizer,” so I’ll segue to the conclusion instead.

Having an honest and logical conversation about Israel and Palestine is nearly impossible in America. The discussion is usually driven by overt racism and hypocritical, nonsensical arguments. Which is why I hate broaching the subject. Given its own ugly history as an apartheid state, America’s current support for Israeli apartheid is that much more repugnant and inexcusable. The degree to which the white majority bullies, disparages, or ignores people of color when we speak out against these injustices shows America has yet to fully exorcise its racist demons. Nevertheless, I have no choice but to speak up when children are being murdered by the thousands. I can only hope that justice might some day prevail, that America might someday evolve. I will certainly do my best to help it along by challenging the bigoted and silly arguments that have always surrounded this topic.

In the interim, Muslims must consider America’s entrenched Islamophobia and its inability to have a rational discussion about its violent policies in reference to its massive $886 billion military budget, its sale of extremely powerful weapons to countries like Israel and India, and its habit of attacking or invading Muslim nations. Combined, these data points show America is a threat to not just the Palestinians, but the entire Muslim world.

The danger will remain until Muslims develop the strength to protect themselves by implementing deep rooted reforms to create democratic governments based on the rule of law that empower their people by educating them and guaranteeing freedom of expression, religion, and association. That is the only way to stimulate the sort of socio-economic and technological development that can lead to improved military capabilities. Until Muslims free themselves from the tyrants and clerics who have ruled them for centuries, they will continue to fall victim to massacres like the one happening in Gaza right now.

Tagged : / / / / / / / / / / / /

21st century lessons for Pakistan’s military 

by Mirrors For The PrinceUncategorized1 Comment on 21st century lessons for Pakistan’s military 

This essay was first published here by the Friday Times on Dec. 20, 2023.

War is an enduring and ugly feature of human society. Though humanity would be far better off focusing on more enlightened pursuits, the carnage consuming Palestine and Ukraine shows what happens to those nations that do not adequately prepare to protect themselves. The following discussion is predicated on the belief that the best way to prepare for peace is to first prepare for war, which is an inherently evolutionary process. Just as human societies are constantly evolving, the way we fight does too. Those who cannot adapt to how technological changes impact the way nations fight each other are doomed to go extinct. As such, military officers across the world should be furiously studying the wars in Palestine, Ukraine, and Azerbaijan for insights that can help them better prepare for their next fight.

Each of these wars contains lessons for Pakistan’s military planners, but they should be particularly interested in the war in Ukraine due to the many parallels between both nations. Like Ukraine, Pakistan shares a long, vulnerable border with a much larger and hostile neighbor to its east. One that has built a massive force of tanks designed to strike deep into its territory and enjoys significant numerical advantages with respect to men and material.

One important difference is that, unlike Ukraine, Pakistan possesses nuclear weapons. Pakistan’s military leaders have developed a doctrine based on using low yield tactical devices to protect themselves, but it is vitally important they prepare for scenarios that do not involve these weapons. Even if the odds are low, they must prepare for all contingencies. Just as the crossbow once rendered the armored knight obsolete, it is inevitable a new weapon or technology will emerge one day that renders nuclear weapons or their delivery systems obsolete too.

Even if they are available for use, detonating nuclear devices to stop advancing Indian armor must be a last resort due to the toxic impact they would have on Pakistan’s already fragile environment. Even if such tactics were successful, they would only provide a pyrrhic victory that would leave many parts of Pakistan’s most fertile land a radioactive cesspool. It is therefore imperative Pakistan’s military prepare to repel an Indian invasion using only conventional weapons. Thankfully, the war in Ukraine offers an excellent opportunity to study how given the way its military has stymied Russia’s advances while inflicting unprecedented casualties on its forces.

Lesson 1: the importance of combined arms and integrating drones into the order of battle

Though not exactly a new lesson, the war in Ukraine has reinforced the importance of mastering combined arms operations, which involves using different assets like tanks and infantry together, in a mutually reinforcing way. Russia’s lumbering assault during the early days of its invasion prevented it from taking Ukraine’s capital city of Kiev and exposed its overextended forces to the nimble counterattack of Ukrainian artillery, armor, infantry armed with anti-tank weapons, drones, special operations troops, snipers, and information warfare specialists. These different units all worked together to wreak havoc and confusion on their enemies. Russia’s troops, on the other hand, did not work together to reinforce each other. Instead, its armor often advanced without proper support or coordination with infantry or air assets, making them easy targets for Ukraine’s forces.

The real lesson here is not in the value of combined arms, which has been obvious for a long time, but in appreciating that the list of weapons platforms that must be combined into a cohesive fighting force has grown considerably longer. Whereas older generations of soldiers merely had to integrate infantry, armor, artillery, and air support, today’s troops will need to add drones, loitering munitions, missiles, rockets, and even social media that can provide open-source intelligence into their arsenals. Ukraine’s ability to integrate these different assets into its order of battle was a key factor in allowing it to stop Russia’s advances and target its supply lines and rear areas. This allowed it to kill an unprecedented number of Russian troops, decimating many of its units. According to retired Admiral James Stavridis, Ukraine’s tactics fused “intelligence provided by the West; the portability of the missile and drone systems,” allowing it to destroy thousands of Russian tanks, armored fighting vehicles, and heavy trucks while killing an estimated 30,000-47,000 of its soldiers (by way of comparison, Russia lost a total of 14,500 soldiers during the entirety of its ten year occupation of Afghanistan).

Out of all these new weapon systems, drones are obviously the most important while tactical missiles are a close second. Ukraine’s ability to use drones for offensive operations, gathering intelligence, as automated mines, and even for medical evacuations should, by itself, occupy students of warfare for years. Their importance is also confirmed by the results of Azerbaijan’s offensive against Armenian forces in Nagorno-Karabakh which introduced the world to Turkey’s now famous Bayraktar drone platform. Much like Ukraine’s military, Azerbaijan’s extensive use of drones to scout the location of enemy units and then deliver precision fire onto those targets played a pivotal role in allowing it to retake its lost territory. One of the factors that made both nations’ use of drones so effective was the degree to which they were used in conjunction with other assets like artillery and rockets and the way troops on the front lines were able to use them to coordinate strikes with command elements in rear areas.  

The key point is that Pakistan’s military must invest in drones and missiles of all shapes, sizes, and functions and it must integrate them within all levels of its forces from the squad and platoon level to the divisional headquarters level to ensure their maximum effectiveness. Drones and tactical missiles are not just the latest military technology of import, but also represent a cost-effective way to counter India’s numerical advantages. Ukraine has been able to use relatively cheap drones and anti-tank weapons that cost hundreds of thousands of dollars to destroy multi-million dollar tanks, aircraft and naval vessels. For example, one of its naval drones only costs $433,000 dollars, which is a bargain compared to the vessels it is designed to sink. Pakistan would be wise to invest in similar capabilities.

Lesson 2: the need to operate in dispersed formations

One of the more important developments in Ukraine has been the use of drones, open-source intelligence, and satellites to provide targeting information for artillery, aircraft, missiles, and rockets. This has allowed Ukrainian forces to attack large formations of Russian troops and personnel from vast distances. In one instance, it launched a missile strike on the headquarters of Russia’s Black Sea Fleet, killing many of its top officers, including its commander Vice Admiral Victor Solokov. In another, it killed 400 Russian troops in a staging area using America’s HIMARS rocket system. But these are just two of many examples that highlight its ability to attack troops miles from the front or deep within Russian territory.

The ability to launch precise strikes on troop formations over long distances has brought home the need to disperse formations into smaller units. This issue was raised in the nineteenth century by the famous German strategist Von Moltke when he discussed the need to “march divided; strike united” but now takes on heightened importance.

Armies will need to hide their troops and weapons over wide geographical areas but still use them in a coordinated fashion. This will require devolving command down to junior officers in the field as much as possible and teaching them to act independently. Massing troops or tanks against an enemy like India which has satellites, drones, and long-range strike capabilities will be tantamount to suicide.

3. the need for secure communications   

The implications of lessons 1 and 2 lead us to our next point. The need for secure communications networks cannot be overstated. Ukraine’s ability to use drones so effectively is based, in part, on its access to American satellites and communications support which allows it to securely coordinate forces in the field. Operating drones, integrating open-source intelligence from social media with artillery and missile units, and dispersing formations over large geographical areas cannot happen without a secure and reliable communications network. That means satellites, encryption, and cyber warfare capabilities to protect one’s network while attacking or exploiting the enemy’s network. For example, many of the Russian flag officers killed by Ukrainian forces were likely betrayed by their own cell phones, and Ukraine’s ability to track them.

Here, Pakistan relies mostly on Chinese equipment and expertise and will certainly benefit from its ally’s growing capabilities in all these areas, especially those related to satellites. However, India will still have an edge for two reasons. One, as its recent lunar mission shows, it has already developed strong indigenous capabilities in this area. And two, its growing relationship with America and Israel will give it access to cutting edge technology related to AI and quantum computers over the next few decades that could enable it to successfully monitor or disrupt Pakistani communications during a war.

Pakistan must work to overcome its critical weaknesses in these areas by investing in developing the necessary indigenous capabilities as well as a backup plan should India disrupt its communications networks. To that end, studying the low-tech tactics used by Hamas to evade Israel’s expansive signals intelligence net would be wise. Whether it uses advanced satellites or pigeons is irrelevant so long as it develops a plan with lots of redundancies to maintain control over its forces in the face of sophisticated and wide-ranging attempts to disrupt that control.

Lesson 4: denying the enemy air and naval supremacy is an effective substitute for achieving it1

In terms of fighter aircraft and naval assets, Russia vastly outnumbers Ukraine. However, Ukraine has managed to deny Russia both air and naval superiority, in part, by using anti-aircraft and anti-ships missiles to inflict heavy casualties, including sinking Russia’s flagship vessel, the Moscova and destroying 90 of its planes. It has also protected its forces by dispersing and constantly moving its own assets.

Rather than pursuing the unrealistic goal of achieving air or naval superiority, Ukraine has focused on denying Russia this ability. In doing so, it has maintained freedom of action for itself in both domains while forcing Russia to think twice before deploying its own assets.

The implications should be obvious for Pakistan as it suffers from comparable numerical disadvantages. Instead of trying to match India ship for ship or fighter for fighter, investing in sea and air denial capabilities like anti-aircraft and missile defense systems capable of intercepting hypersonic cruise missiles and drones would be a more prudent allocation of resources. The ability to launch and defend missile barrages and long-range drone attacks will play a crucial role in the wars of the next few decades.

As the war in Gaza shows, those who cannot protect themselves from such attacks will suffer mightily. While those like Israel, who can, will gain a significant advantage. In fact, Iran and Hezballoh did not enter the fight after Oct. 7th precisely because they know Israel’s air defenses, like its Iron Dome system, can protect it from their missile attacks, while they cannot protect themselves from Israel’s air force.  

With respect to targeting India’s navy, the use of drones and long-distance munitions guided by satellites would prove invaluable and highlight once more the importance of acquiring such capabilities. By using such methods along with naval drones that can act as mines, Pakistan could exact a heavy toll on any attempt by India to impose a naval blockade on its cities for a relative bargain.

Lesson 5: supply chains and the need for self-reliance

Modern wars require sophisticated and expensive weapons platforms like advanced fighters, tanks, and satellites. They also require consumables like the unbelievably large number of shells, bullets, bombs, missiles, and rockets expended in Ukraine and Gaza. Within just the first month of the war, Ukraine went through  17,000 Javelin anti-tank weapons. Russia is estimated to be using 20,000 artillery shells a day compared to 4,000 for Ukraine. Similarly, Israel used 25,000 tons of explosives and 100,000 shells to destroy Gaza in just six weeks.

The resources spent acquiring weapons, the high consumption rate of battlefield items, and the extent to which these must be imported from allied nations raises the age-old debate of guns versus butter and the degree to which nations must be self-reliant in such matters. There are several layers to this dilemma. Pakistan must build or acquire a range of new weapons like drones and missile defense systems that will cost billions. It must ensure it has the capacity to replenish its supplies during a war. And it must pay for all this without destroying its economy while still providing the social services its people so desperately need. Which raises the question of how.

Israel, Azerbaijan, and Ukraine have all received substantial support from allies in supplying their forces. Azerbaijan benefited from Turkish and Israeli weapons and training. Ukraine received $44 billion in arms from America while Israel has received $260 billion over the decades.

Having powerful allies certainly helps, but developing an excessive dependance on them is not the answer. Ukraine is very likely to learn this lesson the hard way if a Republican wins the Presidency next year and cuts off America’s support. Even Israel’s need for a steady delivery of munitions or to have two American aircraft carriers positioned nearby highlights its long-term vulnerabilities if it must ever survive on its own.  

Pakistan is following a similar path by making itself dependent on China for its military and economic needs. This is a crucial mistake. Pakistan may consider China its “iron brother” but that ignores the simple fact that no one knows what the future will bring. China’s political system is inherently unstable in the same way all authoritarian dictatorships are. Believing China will always be there to help is more of a child’s wish, than a strategy and ignores a universal truth. No state that wishes to be certain it can protect the lives of its citizens can become dependent on another state for its basic security needs. As the Muslim world’s colonial past illustrates, this is the path to servitude and conquest, not freedom. The evidence provided by the historical record leaves no doubt; when it comes to matters of defense, a nation must be self-reliant.

To make itself self-reliant, Pakistan must embrace democracy. As explained previously, democratic political systems are ideally suited to building and sustaining military power in the modern age. They are the best at generating the wealth, technology, industrial capabilities, and well-trained soldiers needed to field powerful militaries. Pakistan must also create a business-friendly environment by minimizing red tape and regulation, and an honest and efficient court system and law enforcement apparatus. Democracy and the rule of law go hand in hand. One cannot function without the other.

These reforms will be necessary if Pakistan’s leaders ever hope to build an advanced industrial sector. The key to protecting Pakistan is not just importing more tanks or bombs but building an industrial and scientific base that can continually design and manufacture the next generation of weapons. Building one will also require investing in its public education system and universities. Of course, there is no point in building schools if their students are not given a proper education that encourages them to think for themselves. That requires creating an intellectual climate where people are free to speak their minds and express themselves.

In addition to these political, economic, legal, and social reforms, Pakistan must get its finances in order. In 2021, its government collected only 10.4% of GDP in tax receipts. The average for Asian nations is 19.1%. Pakistan must bridge this gap while bringing more of its estimated $180 billion informal economy into the taxpaying realm. Taxing just a third of its informal economy while getting its tax collection rates to 15% would boost revenues by over $20 billion.   

Implementing these reforms has proven impossible because they would require gutting Pakistan’s government agencies from top to bottom, modernizing them, and then subjecting them to vigilant oversight to make sure public funds are spent where they are needed rather than stolen by corrupt bureaucrats and politicians. In other words, Pakistan’s elites must do what they have adamantly refused to do for decades: build a modern administrative state and the competent tax, law enforcement, regulatory, and judicial agencies that come with it. Instead of providing these desperately needed public services, Pakistan’s leaders have hijacked their government to enrich themselves. 

Like most Muslim nations, Pakistan’s government is non-democratic, non-responsive to the needs of its people, and excessively authoritarian. Its generals, both retired and active duty, hold the lion’s share of the country’s political, economic, and military power. They have created the veneer of democracy, but no true democracy can function properly with the military as its center. Their actions even go against the advice of one of the Muslim world’s greatest thinkers. Ibn Khaldun warned centuries ago that military commanders or “Amirs” should never go into business for themselves. It eventually ruins a nation’s economic foundation and tax base, impoverishing and destroying it in the process.

Sadly, Pakistan’s generals will never voluntarily give up their power or their business interests since they feed off and reinforce each other. Which is a pity, because their time would be better spent focusing on how the developments heralded by the many wars raging around the world might impact their doctrine and tactics. Better yet, they should be in the field, constantly training to hone and perfect their skills, which must be varied and versatile. The soldiers of today must be able to punch and counterpunch in a variety of settings. They must be adept at urban warfare, maneuver warfare, and preparing and protecting static defenses in depth. The fluidity of war demands troops who can handle a variety of contingencies. That requires constant training for different scenarios and practicing different skills. Business ventures, corporate farming, and political machinations are all a distraction from these more important pursuits. Instead of assigning infantry and intelligence officers to the NAB, the army should be billeting officers to posts that will help them be better soldiers.  

Pakistan’s refusal to change, even though it has lost every war it has fought with India, has also prevented it from building the sort of strategic depth with its Muslim neighbors that could help it resist Indian hegemony. Yet one more benefit of democracy is that it makes creating strong alliances, like the one Europe’s nations created after WW2, much easier. The Muslim world’s lack of democracy has not only kept its nations individually weak and backwards, but it has also prevented them from meaningfully connecting to each other. Secular democracy is the key to uniting the Muslim world, whereas ideologies like those articulated by the Taliban or ISIS will only keep its incredibly diverse nations and people divided.

Lesson 6: the need for strategic depth

While self-reliance may be essential to ensuring one’s freedom, nations still need allies. Developing strong alliances is an important facet of augmenting a nation’s geo-political strength. But they must be the right kind of alliance.

Pakistan’s alliance with China, as currently structured, is counter to its long-term interests. Putting aside China’s repression of the Uighurs, which is enough by itself to question the viability of this pairing, Pakistan has become dependent on importing Chinese expertise, capital, and goods, stunting its own development in the process. Instead of building a neo-colonial relationship with China, Pakistan must build alliances that help it develop its own capabilities. CPEC is designed to turn Pakistan into a shipping and distribution hub for the goods China makes. If Pakistan wants real wealth and power, it must learn to manufacture its own goods, raise its own capital, and develop its own expertise.

The allies most suited to helping it achieve these goals are Turkey and Iran. The former’s advanced industrial base and weapon’s industry and the latter’s advanced missile and space programs would prove vital in helping Pakistan improve its capabilities in these areas. Building a free trade zone and increasing military cooperation between these three nations would not only provide Pakistan the strategic depth it has always sought, but represents a smart, long term move for each country. One that would significantly improve each nation’s geo-political position. As the author has already argued on many occasions, these countries have the potential to form the core of a new Muslim security organization similar to NATO and a powerful economic bloc of over 400,000,000 million people.   

Like all good ideas, an alliance between Turkey, Pakistan, and Iran recommends itself on many levels. Ideally, it would help Pakistan develop enough power to dissuade India from ever attacking it. Failing that, it would give Pakistan the power to decisively defeat an Indian attack. In a worst-case scenario, it could also form the basis for a network to supply an anti-India insurgency in the event such efforts ever became necessary. In this regard, developing close ties with Iran is extremely important.

The idea of attaining strategic depth is a concept most Pakistanis are already familiar with, though it is typically and unimaginatively limited to the Afghan context. Pakistan’s narrow width and the vulnerability of its key population and industrial centers has long been a source of worry for its leaders. Events in Ukraine have only highlighted the validity of their concerns. Despite launching a clumsy offensive that failed to reach its primary objectives and suffering heavy casualties, Russia’s military still managed to capture and occupy 110,000 square kilometers of Ukrainian territory during the first month of its invasion. It still controls roughly 60,000 square kilometers of this territory. The implications for Pakistan are extremely worrying. Russian numerical superiority was simply too overwhelming to prevent it from taking at least some territory. Luckily, Ukraine is a large country, and its capital is located far from Russian territory. As such, it was able to absorb these losses.

Pakistan’s ability to cede land is far more limited. Nonetheless, a determined Indian attack could very easily lead to captured territory. Over the long run, dispersing India’s forces over a wide swath of hostile territory would ultimately turn to Pakistan’s advantage so long as it can still maintain organized resistance. Building joint infrastructure and weapons production facilities with Iran represents the most obvious way to do that. Geography, religion, and their shared mutual interests all dictate that Pakistan and Iran form an alliance. Each even has ports the other could use to break a blockade. Unfortunately, the Muslim world is in such a pitiful state these days that Iran’s Chabahar Port is under management with an Indian company, which means it is far more likely to be used to destabilize Pakistan than protect it.

China would do its best to keep Pakistan armed in the event of a war with India, but the supply lines that connect them are extremely vulnerable to attack. Due to India’s naval superiority in the Indian Ocean and the ease with which it could target the Karakoram highway, China’s attempts to replenish Pakistan’s stocks could easily be interdicted by India. Iran, on the other hand, would provide the perfect base to build factories in a safe and accessible area.

Pakistan has failed to develop strong economic or military ties with Iran, despite the obvious benefits, primarily because neither America nor the Arabs would react well. Here again, we see the consequences of Pakistan’s fragile political economy. Its leaders are so beholden to America and their Arab patrons, they are not even free to pursue a strategy that would drastically improve their nation’s economic and geo-strategic position.

Pakistan’s leaders would do well to remind those Arab nations that complain about its pursuit of brotherly relations with Iran of their own multi-billion dollar investments in India. Similarly, if America is free to arm and invest in India, then Pakistan must also be free to build its relationship with Iran. America has no right to prevent neighbors from trading with each other and Pakistan’s leaders must not give in to its blackmail and threats. Even if America were to punish Pakistan by refusing to trade with it, the late Zia Ul-Haq would probably describe losing $6 billion in exports as mere “peanuts” compared to the revenue properly linking with Iran and Turkey could generate.

While Pakistan should strive for good relations with America, it must not sacrifice its vital interests to appease it. Linking with its Muslim neighbors, particularly Iran, is Pakistan’s surest and most logical path to building the strength needed to protect itself. Connecting with them is far more important to Pakistan’s long-term interests and survival than maintaining its perpetually strained and disappointing relationship with America.

Lesson 7: the price of failure

One does not need to be a student of war to understand the devastation being visited upon the poor people of Gaza. The Israeli military has already killed at least 18,412 people, roughly 70% of whom were women and children. Out of all the lessons discussed thus far, it is the rubble of Gaza that holds the most important ones. Those charged with protecting Pakistan should spend several hours staring at pictures of Gaza’s smashed and bloodied babies or the burial pits filled with their bodies. They should intently study the blocks of rubble that once held homes, mosques, and shops but now serve as tombs for countless innocent women and children. This is the price of failure. This is what the supposedly enlightened, liberal West is still capable of doing to those it considers less than human. Those who believe Gaza is the exception, not the rule, have clearly not been paying attention. It is hardly the only part of the Muslim world that has been subject to such violence. Chechnya, Kashmir, Iraq, Lebanon, Yemen, Syria, Afghanistan. The list is long, depressing, and barely scratches the surface.

If Pakistan’s leaders do not drastically change course, Lahore’s children could very easily suffer the same fate as Gaza’s thirty years from now. If India is using American made missiles and jets to inflict this pain, no one will stop it. No one will help.

The “rules based” international order touted by the West does not exist. The only discernible rule is that America and its allies are allowed to do as they please while the rest of the world must follow their rules. The truth is that America and Russia broke the international system that was supposed to guarantee peace after WW2. Since defeating the Nazis, these two nations have invaded numerous countries, supported coups or violent insurgencies in many others, and flooded the world with their weapons. Their actions have infected the world’s nations with a lust for war and the means to act on their worst impulses.

Ideally, Pakistan, India, and China should learn from their colonial past by cooperating and working together rather than waste their money enriching Western or Russian arms dealers. War is never the ideal solution.  But given the world we live in; it is one all sane governments must prepare for. As nations fill their arsenals with deadlier and deadlier weapons, the devastation they visit upon each other will only grow in intensity and cruelty. Pakistan’s leaders must prepare accordingly by focusing on long-term solutions that can ensure they have the resources needed to protect their country.

The amount of resources each nation must devote to such matters is determined by their unique geopolitical situation. Given the right-wing lunacy gripping India and the degree to which America is arming its new ally, Pakistan finds itself confronted by an increasingly dangerous, powerful, and hostile neighbor. While it must certainly consider how its own actions have contributed to India’s hostility and work towards peace, its leaders must also take a clear-eyed view of the ramifications of India’s growing power and belligerence. As its arsenal grows, the desire to use it will too.    

  1. The ideas discussed in this section borrowed heavily from the ideas expressed by Stephen Biddle in his article about the war in Ukraine published by Foreign Affairs Magazine. https://www.foreignaffairs.com/ukraine/back-trenches-technology-warfare
Tagged : / / / / / / / /

What should Israel do?

by Mirrors For The PrinceUncategorizedLeave a Comment on What should Israel do?

This essay was first published here, by the Friday Times on Nov. 29, 2023.

Some of the commentators who support Israel’s bombing and invasion of Gaza have been incredulously asking what those who have been calling for a cease-fire suggest Israel do instead of pursuing military action. 

The first and most important thing Israel should do is put grownups in charge of its government. To that end, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu must step down immediately. In fact, Israel’s entire Kahanist led government is an affront to human decency and must go along with him. Men like Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, who think Arabs deserve “differentiated rights” or his partner in crime Minister for National Security Itamar Ben Gvir, have no place in government. Not only did their incompetent clown show lead to Israel’s greatest security failure in fifty years but they are clearly not the sort of men who should be formulating its plans to stabilize Gaza after the fighting stops. If these men had any decency, they would have resigned within a week of Hamas’ attack, once the immediate emergency had passed.

Thankfully, recent polls suggest Netanyahu’s days are numbered. The question then becomes, who will take over? And what sort of policies will they implement? The problem is the Israeli electorate has shifted so far to the right; they are unlikely to choose leaders capable of addressing the root of Israel’s problems: the occupation of the West Bank. If Israel really wants to address the situation in Gaza, it needs to bring peace to the West Bank first.

The most logical way to do that is to incorporate it into Israel and finally do away with the fiction of the Green Line. The Green Line, the Palestinian Authority and the administrative absurdities built around them are all meant to obscure the fact that Israel is the controlling political and military authority over the West Bank. Admitting the two-state solution is dead and officially incorporating the West Bank into Israel so its citizens can enjoy equal rights and have a fair say in running the government that rules them represents Israel’s most logical path to peace. 

Alternatively, forcing the roughly 450,000 Israeli settlers currently living there to relocate back across the Green Line or become citizens of a new Palestinian state would also work. In either case, it is time to dismantle Israel’s apartheid regime and give the Palestinians of the West Bank their freedom. 

Sadly, none of this will happen anytime soon since most Israelis would strongly oppose such measures. In the absence of a long-term solution, the least Israel’s leaders can do is stop trying to set the West Bank on fire. Stop murdering the Palestinians who live there. Stop using flimsy legal excuses to seize their property. Stop arresting them arbitrarily and then torturing them or holding them without trial or due process. Protecting them from the settlers who have been attacking and killing them would be nice too. By just doing the basic things a government is supposed to do for the people it rules and treating them the same regardless of their religion or ethnicity, Israel would make significant progress towards peace.  

Of course, the question was directed towards the current situation in Gaza, not long-term fixes. Even here, the solutions are not terribly complicated. For starters, Israel must stop killing women and children. It should also stop attacking hospitals, even if Hamas is using them to store weapons. Instead, its medical personnel should be working to keep Gaza’s hospitals operational so they can begin treating the staggering number of innocents wounded by its indiscriminate bombing and shelling. Israel’s military is now responsible for the well-being of the civilians who have been hurt or displaced due to its attacks and must therefore provide them with food, temporary shelter, and medical care. It will also need to start digging out the dead and giving them proper burials. 

Once it stabilizes the humanitarian situation, it should start talking to Hamas’ leaders about a long-term peace deal. Many will find this sentiment revolting, but it is Israel’s least bad option. Those who refuse to contemplate such a course of action on the basis that Hamas’ leaders must be punished would do well to remember that life is rarely fair.

America massacred millions in Vietnam and none of the elected officials responsible went to jail. George Bush fabricated evidence to justify starting a war that killed or displaced millions and gets to spend his retirement finger painting. Dick Cheney got rich from that same war and gets to spend his retirement in luxury too. Dozens of women accused Deshaun Watson of sexual assault and he was rewarded with a $230 million payday. Sometimes, the bad guys get away with it. Despite the stench, negotiating with Hamas is Israel’s best option.

The alternative is re-occupying Gaza. As Israel’s experiences in Lebanon and America’s experiences in Iraq and Afghanistan show, military occupations do not always go according to plan. As explained here in more detail, a comparison of America’s successful occupations of Germany and Japan versus its unsuccessful ones in Iraq and Afghanistan shows troop levels play an important role in the outcome. America stationed 1 soldier in West Germany for every 31.8 civilians but only 1 for every 8,640 Afghans. Providing a force comparable to the one that secured West Germany for Gaza would take almost 72,000 troops. Israel simply does not have the manpower to occupy Gaza over the long run while it simultaneously occupies the West Bank and remains on heightened alert in the north. Doing so would strain its manpower reserves while breaking its economy in the process. 

Much like their counterparts in America’s military, the IDF’s officers are too busy winning every battle and counting bodies to consider these long-term issues. From their perspective, the invasion has gone smoothly and there is no need to worry. But that is partially because Hamas has yet to fully engage its forces. Much like the Taliban in the face of America’s onslaught, its fighters have mostly melted away. Rather than take on Israel’s deadly Merkava battle tanks, Hamas has wisely decided to conserve its strength.

If this is the case, it is a shrewd tactical decision that indicates Hamas is playing the long game or possibly even baiting Israel into a trap. How long of a game will become more apparent once the IDF moves south and spreads itself thin securing all of Gaza. At that point, we could easily see an uptick in attacks. When the Taliban withdrew, it was a rushed decision made without the luxury of preparation, so it took them several years to rebuild. If this was part of Hamas’ plan from the beginning, then the timeframe will work differently and there will be an increased tempo in attacks sooner than later. 

Even with its minimal resistance, Hamas has been killing an average of fifteen to twenty Israeli soldiers a week, putting it on pace to kill as many as 1,000 a year. That’s roughly the same number of dead Israel suffered during its entire eighteen-year occupation of Lebanon. This also suggests a military occupation of Gaza will not end well for Israel. Hamas will either continue to mimic the Taliban by returning to power stronger than ever or Israel will find itself fighting a mutated version of its old enemy in the same way Al Qaeda gave way to ISIS. In either case, these enemies will be deadlier and better armed. The only real questions are how long and how many will die in the process. 

While the depressingly familiar story of Israel’s occupation is playing out, America will be burying itself in even more debt and suffering even more political and economic instability as a result. America’s days of riding to the rescue are slowly coming to an end. Which means Israel is currently at the zenith of its power and the time to come to terms with Hamas has never been better. That requires dialogue. If America had talked to the moderate elements within the Taliban or the Ba’ath party, things might have turned out very differently in Afghanistan and Iraq. So, as crazy as it sounds, Israel should try to talk to Hamas. 

Instead of talking, the IDF has expressed a strong preference for killing Hamas’ current leadership. Much like killing the boss of a Mexican drug cartel, this strategy will only cause Hamas to fracture into smaller factions, not destroy it. Keeping its leaders alive is the only way to make sure there are people across the table with the authority to make and enforce a deal.

For such a dialogue to work, Hamas’ leaders will need to finally accept the reality of their situation. Their allies in Iran and Lebanon have abandoned them. They do not have the air defenses to protect themselves from the Israeli Air Force and therefore refused to join the fight. The larger war Hamas hoped to start has failed to materialize. No one is coming to save them. 

The fact that Hamas’ leaders thought starting a larger war was feasible highlights the flawed logic that has always guided their thought process, casting doubt on whether negotiating with them is even worth the time. Despite these substantial hurdles, diplomacy must always be the first choice. One can only hope seeing so many of the women and children under their care torn to pieces or crushed under massive piles of rubble has finally brought home the senselessness of their struggle.

From a moral perspective, Hamas’ continued armed struggle against Israel was no longer justified once it withdrew from Gaza. The minute the IDF and the settlers left, its fighters should have thrown their rifles on the ground and worked towards building a real future for themselves on the little sliver of land they had left. They should have turned Gaza into the next Singapore. Instead, they chose violence. And they chose it in pursuit of a totally unrealistic goal. 

Despite their many missteps and horrible choices, men clever enough to survive a foe as deadly as Israel for so many years cannot be so delusional as to think they can really take back the entirety of Palestine or inflict a lasting military defeat on Israel. As the author suggested several years ago, surrender has long been Hamas’ best course of action. For any peace deal to work, Hamas would need to give up its weapons and promise to stop attacking Israel. Making such an offer, in exchange for their lives, genuine independence, freedom of movement for Gazans and an end to the siege is their best option.

Their crucial mistake was thinking Israel’s political dysfunction was a weakness they could exploit. Its leaders failed to realize that attacking an enemy when it is suffering internal turmoil only breaks the will to fight if you manage to deliver a knockout blow. Anything short of that will only bring the enemy together. The anger and frustration that had previously been directed inwards now finds a more wrathful expression outwards, and Gaza’s poor neighborhoods are turned to dust as a result.

Though their blend of innovative tactics and savagery allowed them to launch a brutal attack on Oct. 7th, a knockout blow of the sort required was never a possibility given Hamas’ relatively weak arsenal of weapons. Launching their attack therefore represents not just a catastrophic moral failure but a strategic one as well. Which is not a coincidence. It is an often overlooked connection, but a truly effective strategy must always be grounded in good morals and decency. Not coincidentally, Israel has failed to subdue the Palestinians because its strategies have also failed to appreciate this connection. 

The greater intensity of this latest cycle of violence and the massive number of casualties vividly illustrates the desperate need for peace. A continuation of the status quo is not sustainable. It will only result in death and despair for everyone. Which is why both Israel and Hamas should be talking, not fighting.

Tagged : / / / / / / / / /

America’s chickens are still coming home to roost

by Mirrors For The PrinceUncategorizedLeave a Comment on America’s chickens are still coming home to roost

This article was first published here by the Friday Times on Oct. 26, 2023.

It was nearly 60 years ago when Malcolm X famously suggested President Kennedy’s assassination was the inevitable result of chickens coming home to roost. One could easily say the same thing about the gun violence consuming America today.

Many of the mass shootings that have been perpetrated the past few years involved AR-15 style assault rifles, which are descended from a rifle originally designed for America’s war in Vietnam. Most estimates indicate America’s invasion killed approximately two million Vietnamese civilians.  Much like its more recent invasion of Iraq, no one knows for certain how many innocents were murdered because no one bothered to count the bodies. But most estimates suggest it unleashed hell. It seems tragically fitting then that a weapon first used to murder countless innocent Vietnamese has now evolved into the symbol of America’s gun culture, and the preferred tool of those who wish to wreak havoc in its schools, places of worship, concert venues, movie theaters, offices, grocery stores, etc. Talk about chickens coming home to roost.

This is not meant to suggest the victims of these mass shootings bear any personal responsibility for their fates, but to point out that we are all impacted by the actions of our nation.  Whether we had any direct participation in them or not is irrelevant. And the sad fact is America’s actions have been unconscionably violent and destructive.

The invasion of Vietnam was an unjust war of imperial aggression launched under the flimsiest of circumstances. The argument that it was necessary to stop the spread of communism is both inaccurate and illogical on many levels. North Vietnam may have been a communist state, but its struggle was primarily an anti-colonial one meant to liberate Southeast Asia from exploitative French rule.

The very premise of the invasion ignored the universal truth that people have the right to choose whatever form of government they want, even an inherently weak one that will inevitably collapse in on itself or give way to dictatorship. The only time war is ever justified is as a means of self-defense or coming to the aid of others in extreme circumstances. Since Vietnam never attacked America, there was no legitimate reason to invade it.

Whether through direct actions such as the invasions of Vietnam and Iraq, or indirect ones such as its prolific arms sales all over the world, America has turned itself into the world’s most violent military power and a merchant of death. Its actions have killed millions all over the world.

Not long after withdrawing from Vietnam, America’s intelligence agencies armed right wing death squads in Central America who murdered hundreds of thousands of women and children. Most were indigenous people guilty of doing nothing more than demanding greater rights over their own land. Since these people held left wing political views, America used its right-wing proxies to unleash hell yet again. Its actions in Central America were neither isolated nor unique.

Under the guise of fighting communism, America supplied arms to right wing regimes and paramilitary groups all over the world. Without this support, the slaughters and oppression committed in places as far flung as Chile, Indonesia, and South Africa would not have been possible.

These crimes were justified by the need to win the Cold War, but that conflict ended over thirty years ago and America’s policies have yet to meaningfully change. If anything, its share of the global arms market and ubiquitous military presence throughout the world has only grown.

During the Cold War, the threat of starting World War 3 prevented America from taking direct military control of the Middle East and its energy supplies. However, once the Soviet Union fell, it used Saddam Hussein’s invasion of Kuwait as a pretext to invade the Muslim world and build a permanent military presence there that endures to this day. The sanctions imposed on Iraq to oust Saddam after the first Gulf War killed an estimated 576,000 Iraqi children. According to a recent study by Brown University, the War on Terror that followed killed 4.5 million more people.

Between WW2, the Cold War, the Korean War, Vietnam, its clandestine actions in Central America, both Iraq wars and the War on Terror, America has been in a nearly perpetual state of conflict for the past 80 years. As the history of the AR-15 shows, there is a direct correlation between these conflicts and the mass shootings it is experiencing now. Even the rifle’s current popularity is based on marketing campaigns that borrowed imagery from the War on Terror. Instead of blaming violent video games, movies, TV shows, or mental health issues which are merely symptoms of the rot engulfing its culture, it is time to recognize that America’s gun violence is the result of being in a nearly continuous state of war for the better part of a century. Just as Pakistan and Afghanistan developed a Kalashnikov culture in the aftermath of the Soviet invasion of the latter, America’s AR-15 subculture is a by-product of its many wars.  

These historical and cultural factors have also been shaped by institutional economic interests. Those wondering why so many of America’s leaders refuse to do anything about gun violence need only follow the money. Its domestic arms industry generates $80 billion in economic activity and nearly 400,000 jobs. By themselves, the 20 million AR-15 style rifles already in circulation represent billions in economic activity. Ten percent of America’s manufacturing base is devoted to war. It is the world’s biggest military spender and arms dealer by a wide margin. It has allocated $816 billion for defense spending in 2023 which employs nearly 4 million people. Its arms sales in 2020 added $285 billion in exports. The F-35 fighter program, by itself, will cost America $1.7 trillion. By some estimates, it has spent $16 trillion on its military over just the past 20 years. When its various segments are combined, America’s arms industry is worth well over a trillion dollars a year. Just as its commercial interests have incentivized it to pursue violent military policies around the world, they have also led to the creation of a flourishing domestic arms industry. One many of its politicians are loath to interfere with no matter how many mass shootings their constituents must endure.

Those who justify America’s policies by pointing to the jobs and money generated from making weapons are chasing fool’s gold. Much of America’s $32 trillion debt was accumulated paying for its military. Building weapons may generate economic activity but when the end-product is a tank or rifle, there is no value added. There is no economic multiplier effect. All the resources used to build weapons are ultimately sunk costs wasted on violence that only leads to death and despair.

As part of a series of articles about the AR-15, The Washington Post published an editorial arguing the rifle should be banned. But over the years, it has published several op-eds arguing America should substantially increase its already massive military spending. Like most American media outlets, it has no issue with America’s aggressive military posture, its unequivocal support for Apartheid Israel, or arms sales to violent regimes around the world. And that vividly highlights the disconnect. Many Americans are desperate to put an end to domestic gun violence but still see no problem with the destructive role their military and weapons sales play throughout the world. But as the AR-15 shows, the two are linked. Addressing one without first addressing the other is therefore impossible.

Unfortunately, just as Malcolm X’s comments did so long ago, the ideas expressed here are more likely to cause outrage and indignation for being too “woke” or “anti-American” instead of the sort of introspection that can lead to meaningful change. In America, those who passionately argue for gun control laws are expelled from their legislative bodies while those same bodies respond to mass shootings by passing laws to protect gun manufacturers from liability. Most of its Supreme Court’s justices claim to follow a philosophy of judicial interpretation grounded in textual analysis and originalism but completely ignore the first clause of the second amendment when analyzing it. Logic and objectivity are no longer valued in America.

Those who agree with the historically and legally dubious argument that the 2nd amendment enshrines an individual right to bear arms inexplicably use their beliefs as a basis for opposing attempts to regulate, vet, and ensure proper training for those who seek to exercise this right. At a minimum, someone attempting to purchase a machine gun should be required to undergo a psychological and competency evaluation as part of the robust permitting process that should govern who can own such items. Given the 2nd amendment’s prefatory language regarding “a well-regulated militia,” requiring these individuals to join the national guard of their respective states would not be unreasonable either. But gun rights advocates passionately oppose attempts to regulate the sale and use of these weapons.

Similarly, convincing Americans they do not need to spend nearly a trillion dollars a year on their military given their nation’s natural geographic defenses has proven impossible. America’s obsession with war and violence is destroying and impoverishing it at the same time, but no one is willing to address these issues in a meaningful way.

Since Americans are no longer capable of having rational discussions about complicated issues, they will not resolve them anytime soon. In the absence of logic, its leaders will continue to prioritize jobs and money over safety or common sense. Ibn Khaldun would probably have said America is in the “senile” stage of its evolution. According to Khaldun, senility was the last, inevitable part of the process of a nation’s fall. Once it sets in, it is irreversible. Having entered its senile stage, America will never voluntarily dismantle its weapons factories, no matter how many of its citizens are slaughtered to feed their machines.

As America tears itself apart, the Muslim world must beware. The commercial interests that drive its military spending will incentivize it to continue attacking Muslim nations or arming those like Israel or India engaged in military confrontations with them. Its history of violence in the Muslim world and the refusal of its leaders to protect even their own citizens both show the same thing: America’s leaders have no regard whatsoever for the sanctity of life, Muslim or otherwise. Which means they will never stray from the militaristic path they have chosen. It is impossible to predict the contours or timing of America’s fall. The Ottomans survived for centuries during their senility. But one thing is certain, the degree to which it has armed itself and the rest of the world will come back to haunt us all.  Which means a lot more chickens will be coming home to roost.

Tagged : / / / /

While Gaza burns, the Muslim world can only watch

by Mirrors For The PrinceUncategorized1 Comment on While Gaza burns, the Muslim world can only watch

This article was first published here by the Friday Times on October 20, 2023.

As the next round in the war between Israel and Hamas unfolds, a story that began with such a shocking twist has taken a very familiar turn. Israel has spent the past week bombing Gaza and Palestinian casualties are mounting by the minute. Israeli infantry and armor are massing for what promises to be a devastating invasion. America has sent two aircraft carrier battle groups to join the fray and its aircraft have already delivered munitions that will surely be used to murder more innocent Palestinians. The West has rallied behind Israel while threatening any within the Muslim world who might dare to interfere.

Many have already noted the similarities between these events and 9/11, mostly to justify Israel’s pending assault. But few have considered all the implications of this comparison. The War on Terror was an unmitigated disaster for America and genocidally devastating for the Muslim world. 4.5 million dead, millions more displaced, entire nations plunged into chaos all to see the Taliban stronger than ever. America suffered thousands of dead, tens of thousands more maimed for the rest of their lives, trillions in debt, and Trump. Both are still dealing with the fallout.

Israel’s invasion and occupation of Lebanon is equally instructive. Thousands of women and children were murdered while its forces suffered significant casualties during the course of their 18-year quagmire. And just as the War on Terror led to the rise of ISIS and its many offshoots, all Israel gained was a new, more potent adversary called Hezbollah.

Despite having the benefit of these cautionary tales, Israel is about to follow a similar path while America gleefully cheers it on. Thousands of women and children are going to suffer violent deaths as they are ripped apart by American and Israeli artillery shells, missiles, and bullets over the next few weeks and months. Lebanon, Syria, the West Bank, and possibly even Iran will burn too. All in the name of fighting evil, or so they’ll claim.

Israel’s desire to hunt Hamas down is understandable, but the simple fact is the only way to do that is to murder thousands of women and children. As Jonah Goldberg argued when castigating those who tried to defend Hamas’ actions, “no amount of context justifies killing babies.” Unfortunately, Mr. Golberg does not appear to apply his own logic to Israel’s actions. Like most Western commentators, he seems to think dropping thousands of pounds of explosives on Gaza’s densely packed neighborhoods and the babies they hold is justified within the context of Hamas’ attack. Even America’s supposedly left-wing, liberal President is out for blood as his administration angrily labeled those few members of Congress who dared to speak for sanity “repugnant.” Netanyahu will use Biden’s greenlight and the Western world’s unequivocal backing to unleash hell. And no one within the Muslim world will be able to stop it from happening.

Except Hamas. By surrendering. We all know this is unlikely to happen, nevertheless, it is still worthwhile to make a short plea in favor of this course of action. Though it is too early to gauge the long-term consequences of its attack, at a minimum it shows Israel’s attempts to marginalize and ignore the Palestinians via the Abraham Accords will never lead to real peace. They also prove that locking people in ghettos and enforcing a military blockade against them for 16 years will have terrible consequences. Hamas has achieved all it could have hoped for on the battlefield by highlighting these simple truths. The next step is to turn these battlefield gains into political gains and the only way to do that is to surrender and recognize Israel’s right to exist as a prelude to peace. Most importantly, doing so is also the only way to prevent the slaughter Israel is preparing.

In fact, the author suggested years ago that all Palestinians “surrender” by laying down their arms and waving white flags as they adopt widespread acts of civil disobedience and non-violent protest to demand equal rights within an undivided Israel. Given what’s about to transpire, the need to do so has never been more urgent. It should be obvious by now that terrorism is not the weapon of the weak. Terrorism is the weapon of the stupid. Terrorism just gives the men with the tanks, howitzers, and strike fighters an excuse to open fire. Non-violence is the only effective weapon the weak have.

For those who might take issue with the term terrorism, Hamas’s attack, though partially directed towards military targets, was primarily geared towards attacking civilians. Since terrorism is best defined as using violence against civilians to achieve a political purpose, these attacks most certainly qualify and must be condemned as such. That such actions are met with joy in some corners of the Muslim world only reinforces the arguments made below regarding its weakness. That anyone would celebrate the murder of a child, even tangentially, is abhorrent. There is no doubt Israel is a brutal apartheid state, and that Palestinians are within their rights to fight for their freedom. But intentionally targeting women and children is disgusting and should never be cheered. The fact that Western nations frequently drop thousand-pound bombs on targets they know to be full of women and children while describing these fatalities as mere “collateral damage” does not excuse similar barbarism on the part of Muslims.

Part of the reason I developed such unabashedly pro-Palestinian sympathies was precisely because of my belief that the IDF attacked and murdered children. I will never forget the video of Mohammad Al-Durrah murdered while sheltering behind his father. My heart broke for Mohammad Dief when I read that the IDF murdered his infant son, three-year-old daughter and wife in 2014. I can only imagine how enduring that kind of pain might impact someone. To see Hamas gunmen do the same has been sickening. One would think they would know better after suffering similarly brutal treatment at the hands of Israel’s military over the years. That burying their own innocent loved ones would have made them cherish all innocents that much more. But the sad fact is those who are abused tend to become abusers. The Nazis brutalized Jews who used those experiences to justify brutalizing Palestinians who responded by brutalizing Jews, and the cycle continues as Israel bombs apartments in Gaza. The only way out of this morass is to break the cycle, not repeat it. Which is why surrender and non-violent resistance are the only real options.

Since my advice has gone unheeded thus far and will likely get ignored again, it will also be necessary to consider the wider ramifications of the situation in Palestine for the Muslim world.  

What is happening in Palestine is a direct result of the same weakness that has consumed Muslim nations for centuries. This weakness was first made evident when Napoleon seized Egypt while the once mighty Ottoman Empire was forced to impotently look on in 1798. It was seen at work again when America conquered and occupied Iraq and Afghanistan at the beginning of this century. Once again, most of the Muslim world could do nothing but sit back and watch.

To understand the roots of this weakness, one must begin with the Muslim world’s governments. Centuries of rule by dictators has left most Muslim nations with repressive and non-responsive governments that stifle expression, innovation and growth. Most are run by people who secure their power through violence, not the consent of the governed. Their primary goal is to cling to power at all costs and enrich themselves, not help their societies prosper. This has made Muslim nations hopelessly weak and technologically backwards.

Due to these repressive political systems, they feature mostly unproductive economies, underdeveloped industrial bases, and awful schools. As a result, even “powerful” Muslim nations must import their most sophisticated arms. As Machiavelli noted centuries ago, dependence on outside powers for military support is a fatal weakness that hobbles rulers, rendering them more servant than ruler. But Muslim have been so bad at creating governments, schools, and private companies that can generate the capabilities required to field modern militaries, they have been forced to create such dependencies. The result: there are no Muslim nations that can protect the Palestinians, just like there were none who could lift Gaza’s siege these past 16 years. None of them have the strength to overtly defy the West. Or China, or even Russia. Muslims have yet to learn how to reconcile ancient beliefs with modern circumstances and the results speak for themselves in Gaza, Kashmir, Chechnya, the camps China has built for the Uighurs, Libya, Syria, Afghanistan, and far too many other places. 

Given the number of massacres the Muslim world has endured these past few centuries, the one that’s about to take place in Gaza will probably not spark any changes either. Muslim elites have accumulated too much power and refuse to share it. Which begs the question, what will it take? How many more atrocities must we watch before Muslims finally wake up? Sadly, no one has the answer to these questions.

Which is a pity because the solutions are obvious. Japan’s feudal elite figured it out with relative ease. South Korea took a more circuitous route but has also managed to modernize itself in record time. As these examples show, Muslim states must institute deep rooted reforms to create democratic governments based on the rule of law that invest in education and protect freedom of expression in all its forms so they can unleash the creative and economic potential of their people. They must also force their elites to play by the same set of rules as everyone else. Allowing the average citizen to thrive is the only way to generate the resources needed to build a military that is not dependent on an outside patron for support.

Aside from taking the steps needed to strengthen themselves individually, Muslim nations must also create organizations comparable to the EU and NATO that can bind them together for their mutual prosperity and protection. Doing so will require connecting to each other in as many ways as possible. Overlapping commercial, cultural, and political interests and linked infrastructure used to facilitate the large-scale movement of goods, people and ideas are the key to strong alliances.

The development of such an alliance, would not only stabilize and strengthen a large chunk of the Muslim world but also presents a path to achieving real peace with Israel. EU style integration predicated on justice for the Palestinians, not military competition, has always been the only logical path to regional stability and peace. Sadly, it will likely take a war on par with the devastation of WW2 before such ideas come to fruition.

Those Muslims who view events in Palestine as irrelevant to their lives or scoff at pan-Islamic sentiments should listen to some of Israel’s more ardent supporters. Presidential hopeful Niki Haley justified her support for Israel by arguing “God has blessed” it. Mike Pompeo, the former head of America’s CIA, argued Israel is not an “occupying nation” due to its “Biblical claim.” Make no mistake, there is a civilizational dynamic to this conflict. What’s happening in the Holy Land traces its roots to medieval disputes and religious affinity. It’s the latest round in the long running war between Islam and the West. One that has seen Western armies repeatedly invade and brutalize Muslim societies. Rather than skirt around this issue, Muslims need to start having honest conversations about the Western world’s pattern of attacking and trying to subjugate them and what they will need to do to protect themselves from further aggression.

The complete lack of empathy displayed by most Westerners for the plight of the Palestinians and their refusal to acknowledge Israel was created through violent conquest and ethnic cleansing show how little regard they have for the violence they have inflicted over the centuries. Which, as the coming weeks will show, means they are perfectly capable of committing such violence again. Aside from a few protests and penning impassioned essays highlighting the hypocrisy of those who grieve for dead children by murdering even more children, Muslims are still too weak to do anything but passively watch these horrors unfold, showing how little has changed over the centuries. Without serious, deep-rooted reforms, this will not be the last massacre we are forced to watch.

Tagged : / / / / / / / / / / /

America is at it again

by Mirrors For The PrinceUncategorized1 Comment on America is at it again

This article was first published here by the Friday Times on August 16, 2023.

There have been whispers lately that the Biden Administration is trying to broker a deal to normalize relations between Saudi Arabia and Israel. In exchange for abandoning the Palestinians, America’s “values-based” President is rumored to be offering his military’s most advanced weapons while the Saudis are reputed to be angling for help building a “civilian” nuclear program and a defense pact. President Biden will surely claim this program is not intended to build nuclear weapons, but it is hard to conceive of any other reason a nation endowed with Saudi Arabia’s oil reserves would covet such technology. These developments provide yet another glimpse into the hypocritical and destructive role America has played in the region while proving its leaders have learned nothing after decades of committing similar blunders.

By trying to expand the Abraham Accords to Saudi Arabia, America is trying to foster a peace between dictators that ignores the underlying cause of conflict between Israel and the Muslim world, namely, the violent oppression of the Palestinians. The simple fact is these deals will never bring real peace to the region for the same reason Israel’s treaties with Egypt and Jordan failed to do so. Without a political agreement that protects the rights of the Palestinians, most Muslims will justifiably remain hostile towards Israel, preventing the establishment of the sort of deep-rooted ties that can lead to genuine peace. Despite the rhetoric about adequate compensation, there can be no doubt: this deal is meant to further marginalize and isolate the Palestinians, not help them.

At best, these accords may sweep the region’s problems under the rug for a time. But the most likely scenario is they will only make its problems worse by exacerbating its underlying issues. The primary significance of these accords is not that they will achieve a sustainable peace but how they prove once more that America has never been an honest broker between the Israelis and Palestinians. In their desperation to help Israel consolidate its de facto annexation of the West Bank, America’s leaders are willing to arm the Arab world’s despots with their most sophisticated weapons.

Saudi Arabia, for example, is governed by a violent monarchical dictatorship. Its war in Yemen has already killed 377,000 people. The Saudi royal family has built a repressive police state to enforce its rule and frequently murders or imprisons those who do nothing more than criticize it. It is not the sort of country America should be selling weapons to, particularly if those weapons create mushroom clouds. Despite these red flags, America has been Saudi Arabia’s primary arms dealer for decades. This deal, however, would take their relationship to a level reserved only for NATO allies. Strengthening Saudi Arabia’s dictatorship to such a degree not only betrays American values but will have a destabilizing and destructive impact on the region in many ways. It is an excellent example of the short-sighted and hypocritical thinking that has always characterized its approach to the region.

But nothing epitomizes American hypocrisy like its support for Israel. Despite the overwhelming evidence that Israel is an apartheid state, the majority of America’s political establishment refuses to admit it. Instead, they prefer to ignore the conclusions of venerable organizations like Humans Rights Watch, Amnesty International, and B’Tselem that have all condemned Israel as a state in which the political and legal system is explicitly designed to empower Jews while violently disenfranchising and marginalizing Palestinians. Though the exact mechanisms may differ from the South African version, Israel’s political economy is designed with the same ends in mind. It is an apartheid state in every meaningful way, just like America was during the Jim Crow era. One that has established violent military control over millions of Palestinians while dispossessing them of their land and rights.

America has been its unabashed supporter and enabler since nearly the beginning. Its leaders laud Israeli “democracy” and send it almost 4 billion dollars a year to ensure its military superiority while ignoring the fact that being a healthy democracy and violent military occupier are mutually exclusive. Sort of like being progressive and supporting apartheid. These glaring inconsistencies aside, American politicians overwhelmingly declare their affection for Israel while vehemently denying its racist nature.

There will always be people who are incapable of admitting the truth about Israel just like there are still people in America who think it is appropriate to teach children slavery provided valuable job skills for black people. But the truth is obvious to anyone capable of putting their tribal instincts aside. What should be equally obvious is that apartheid in all its manifestations and variations is evil. America’s support for Israeli apartheid is especially repugnant given its own ugly history. One would think both Americans and Israelis would have learned by now that political systems designed to empower one group over another based purely on race, religion, or ethnicity are inherently immoral. Sadly, one would be mistaken.

President Biden may pretend to be an ally, but he is an apartheid denier who sees no contradiction between his claims to support equality in America and his willingness to ignore Israel’s crimes against the Palestinians. To his credit, he is not the worst of the bunch. Politicians like Richie Torres, Ron DeSantis and Niki Haley are not just apartheid deniers, but enthusiastic apartheid lovers who seem to take a perverse joy in the repression meted out to the Palestinians.

America’s support for Israeli apartheid and Arab autocracy vividly highlight why it has been such a destructive force in the region. Instead of supporting democracy and defending human rights, America’s policies strengthen the foundational causes of the region’s instability by supporting its authoritarian rulers. Its attempts to bring Israel and Saudi Arabia together are the culmination of a decades-long effort to “stabilize” the region by trampling on the values it claims to stand for.

The best thing America can do for the Middle East is leave it alone. Its sanctions against Iraq killed 576,000 children. According to Brown University, the War on Terror that followed claimed approximately 4.5 million more innocent souls. America has done enough. But despite its genocidal record, its leaders and people still implicitly believe America is exceptional and justified in its hegemonic pursuits. That George Bush is a war criminal is beyond their ability to comprehend.

Conversely, the best thing Saudi Arabia can do is end its neo-colonial relationship with America and learn to stand on its own. The Sauds are desperate for America’s help because, despite turning their nation into the world’s fifth biggest military spender, their armed forces are incompetent. Without the American mercenaries and arms dealers who run its day-to-day operations and supply its weapons, Saudi Arabia’s military would cease to function. This incompetence is a direct result of its repressive political and social systems. The refusal of Saudi leaders to meaningfully empower their people has prevented them from building a military capable of protecting their nation without the help of a foreign patron.

As Machiavelli noted centuries ago, this is the path to servitude, not power. In their desperation to hold on to power at all costs, Saudi leaders ignore the lessons of history and common sense. But this is a depressingly familiar story in the Muslim world, one that epitomizes the dysfunction that has gripped nearly all of it for too long. Despite centuries of conquest and instability, the Muslim world’s rulers refuse to change their ways or admit the obvious truth that creating democratic political systems is the first step to developing adequate military and technological capabilities in the modern age. As a result, they must sell themselves to the West (or Russia, or China or a combination thereof) to maintain their power.  

Nowhere is this more evident than the degree to which Muslim nations have abandoned the Palestinians in exchange for American support for their dictatorships. Collectively using the carrot of normalization could have convinced Israel to make peace with the Palestinians. But the region’s dictators have opted to negotiate individual deals, wasting the only leverage they have left while showing, yet again, how inept they are at doing anything other than cling to power.

Which means the Palestinians will need to stand up for themselves. The best way to do that is to learn from people who have been in similar predicaments. Gandhi, Mandela, and King taught the world how to fight injustice using non-violent, mass civil disobedience. Given their inability to secure their freedom through force of arms, the Palestinians would do well to remember this history. Armed struggle plays directly into the hands of the considerably more powerful IDF whereas adopting non-violent methods of civil disobedience on a massive scale would constitute the sort of indirect approach that would make Liddell Hart proud.

Between Gaza, Israel proper, and the West Bank, the Palestinians constitute a majority of the population between the river and the sea. A one state solution in which they are treated as equals has long been their surest path to freedom. If Israel truly is the democracy its supporters claim it is, they should have no problem fairly sharing power with the Palestinians according to transparent and equitable democratic principles. Of course, these demographic realities are exactly the reason most Israelis refuse to do so, even though their sprawling settlements have made a two-state solution impossible. Instead of creating a truly democratic society, they argue Israel must remain Jewish. In doing so, they are choosing apartheid without having the courage to admit it while simultaneously denying the realities that come with their choice to build their nation in the heart of the Arab world. Nevertheless, as the author already suggested years ago, peacefully forcing Israelis to decide if they would rather live in a Jewish state or a democratic one represents the Palestinians’ last, best option considering the lengths America is willing to go to convince the world to forget about them.

Tagged : / / / / / / /

How a more powerful US-backed India spells trouble for Pakistan

by Mirrors For The PrinceUncategorized3 Comments on How a more powerful US-backed India spells trouble for Pakistan

This article was first published here by the Friday Times on July 3, 2023.

Understanding the world and where it’s heading requires understanding how seemingly unrelated pieces of information fit together. For example, at first glance a tourism summit, an agreement to build jet engines, and a map in a new parliament building may not seem connected. But these three data points highlight trends that should worry those charged with leading and protecting Pakistan.

India’s G20 tourism summit in Kashmir last month was meant to show the world that the disputed territory was peaceful and prosperous. Despite the heavy presence of Indian soldiers and drastic security measures that strongly suggested otherwise, most of the world seemed to accept India’s Orwellian narrative. Aside from a few of Pakistan’s close allies, the G20’s members were happy to help India whitewash its brutal military occupation of the Himalayan state. One that has claimed the lives of roughly 100,000 Kashmiris who desired nothing more than the right to govern themselves as free people instead of living as second class subjects under a hostile regime.

Next, we have the various military and technological cooperation agreements signed between India and America during Prime Minister Modi’s visit to celebrate the growing strategic partnership between both nations. The deal to build jet engines was one of many designed to drastically improve India’s military capabilities while connecting it to America’s defense industry.

Finally, we have India’s new parliament building which prominently displays a map of an “undivided India” depicting Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Myanmar, Nepal and Pakistan as part of a unified India. When its neighbors voiced their concerns, India’s leaders insisted the map was only meant as an homage to an ancient Indian empire. But India’s Minister of Parliamentary Affairs, Pralhad Joshi, did not partake in such gaslighting. Via twitter, he succinctly explained the map shows India’s resolve to pursue an extremist right-wing agenda predicated on uniting the Subcontinent into a single nation, presumably one governed from New Delhi called “Akhand Bharat.”

In their own way, each of these data points reinforces one unmistakable truth. Pakistan is in trouble. The tourism summit proves the world will turn a blind eye to India’s horrific human rights abuses in Kashmir as well as its increasingly heavy-handed approach to the region. While the military agreements highlight America’s intent to actively help India commit new abuses by turning it into a formidable military power. The map is a frightening indication of how India intends to use its new power. It is a stark reminder of the right-wing lunacy that has fueled the BJP’s rise to power and how these developments might destabilize the entire region.

To understand how, one need only look to the Middle East. Just as its unequivocal support empowered Israel to attack and subjugate the Arabs, America’s support for India could have the same impact on the Subcontinent. Its blind insistence that Israel is a healthy democracy even though it is clearly a violent apartheid state shows it will employ the same gaslighting to shield India if it pursues similar policies.

These are not the only data points that should worry Pakistan. The summit and military agreements are merely a reflection of India’s growing clout on the world stage since it implemented a series of economic reforms in the 90’s. Due to these reforms, India will soon have the world’s third biggest economy. Its increased wealth has translated to more power and significantly larger military budgets.

Similarly, the map of an “undivided India” is not the only example of India’s rightward lurch. The BJP’s attacks on free speech and the marginalization of India’s minorities, particularly its Muslims have already been well documented. Perhaps the biggest indication of India’s growing fanaticism is the fact that the guy pegged to replace Modi, Yogi Adityanath, is a right-wing thug masquerading as a Hindu priest.

Unfortunately, there is so much data pointing to danger for Pakistan that it is difficult to sift through it all or even know which data set to prioritize. Whether from the growing power of its neighbor to the east, its stagnant and inefficient economy, dysfunctional political system, deteriorating internal security situation, exploding population, or climate change, Pakistan faces a myriad of threats that are only getting more challenging by the day. Each is potentially existential in nature.

Thankfully, the solution to all these problems is the same. Pakistan’s government must finally start providing the public services needed to nurture the economic and technological development that can allow it to prosper and protect itself in an increasingly unhinged world. The future belongs to those nations capable of building advanced semiconductors, quantum computers, A.I. powered software, and similar goods. Building a scientific and industrial base that can lead to these abilities will require deep rooted reforms designed to empower and educate its people, improve its finances, and establish the rule of law.

Instead of implementing these desperately needed reforms, its leaders have opted to use China as a crutch. However, creating a neo-colonial dependency on China will only provide the illusion of modernization without any of the substance. As India’s example so poignantly illustrates, Pakistan will never prosper until it creates a democratic political system that can unleash the energy of its people. Until that happens, the threats to its freedom and prosperity will only grow.

Tagged : / / / / / / /

America’s decline will bring chaos the Muslim world is unprepared for

by Mirrors For The PrinceUncategorized1 Comment on America’s decline will bring chaos the Muslim world is unprepared for

This article was first published here by the Friday Times on June 15, 2023


Several years ago, when its national debt was just $20 trillion, I wrote an essay arguing America’s weak finances would lead it to withdraw its military from the Muslim world, creating a vacuum China would fill. The underlying premise of my argument was that America’s growing debt would force its leaders to trim military spending and the Muslim world, not being vital to its core interests, would be the first to witness the beginning of the end of the Pax Americana. A retrenchment necessitated by being in a nearly continuous state of either hot, cold, or asymmetrical war for most of the past 80 years.

America’s military presence in the region is still going strong today. It maintains a permanent naval presence in the Gulf and has troops scattered throughout the region. However, its attempts to build an anti-Iranian military coalition between Israel and the Arab world as an eventual substitute for its own forces and the recent rapprochement between Iran and Saudi Arabia brokered by China suggests I was on the right track. Both developments support the argument that its role in the region is diminishing and portend trends that will only accelerate with time. As such, I am still confident in my thesis. But I was wrong about one crucial assumption.

I implicitly believed America’s leaders would react rationally. That they would see the massive pile of debt their wasteful spending and imperial wars of conquest have led to and develop a rational plan to fix the situation. I was wrong.

As evidence, I offer the recent deal reached between the Biden Administration and the Republican led Congress to raise America’s debt ceiling to accommodate a sum that has now grown to $31.4 trillion. There are two aspects of this deal that vividly highlight just how irrational and detached from reality America’s policy elite have become. The first, it cut funding for America’s tax collection and enforcement agency, the IRS. Second, it did not cut military spending. Instead, it increased military outlays by 1%.

Of the government agencies and departments most vital to a nation’s prosperity and security, none is more important than those that collect tax revenue. Not even the military. As Pakistan’s dysfunctional government and economy shows, without a well-funded and efficient tax collection and enforcement agency nothing else works. Paying for the public services like roads, competent law enforcement and regulatory agencies, or schools that glue a nation together and nurture economic activity becomes impossible. Also, as a matter of common sense, when the government has accrued $31.4 trillion in debt, it should be trying to increase revenue and collections.

But America’s conservative faction fought hard to claw back some of the funding that President Biden wisely allocated to the IRS. In doing so they did not just contradict their stated desire to improve America’s finances, they helped illustrate just how irrational its leaders have become.

By itself, the attack on the IRS staged by America’s right was unsettling enough. But what was far more upsetting was how little discussion there was about the root cause of America’s debt by either of its political factions.

Over the past 20 years, America has spent $16 trillion on its military and that is a conservative estimate that does not account for certain intelligence activities like those provided by the CIA or the cost of its nuclear arsenal, parts of which gets budgeted under the Department of Energy for accounting purposes. It also excludes the cost of caring for its veterans and the national security functions performed by the Department of Homeland Security. For those keeping track, the conservative estimate is over half its debt.

Due to this spending, America is the most dominant military power in the world by a wide margin. It fields a massive arsenal of the most advanced tanks, fighters, drones, submarines, and aircraft carriers. Despite having already spent trillions to build this impressive force and having important geographic advantages that protect it from invasion, there was no meaningful discussion about cutting military spending. Perhaps that has something to do with the fact that so many of the professionals paid to discuss these issues work for defense contractors? One can only guess. Thankfully, understanding why is not important. What is important is recognizing the fact that military spending is America’s holy grail. One that neither party will ever meaningfully threaten, no matter how bleak its finances.

Some may argue that events in Ukraine and the Pacific justify America’s refusal to scale back its military. But these arguments do not fare well under closer scrutiny. Aside from the fact that Europe should be defending itself, the bear we were all raised to fear has proven less ferocious than previously imagined. Russia and Western Europe will never be friends and Europe’s nations will always need to prepare accordingly, but the idea that Russia presents a threat to America is ludicrous.

America’s fixation with containing China is equally illogical. Again, as a preliminary matter, protecting Asia is not America’s responsibility. That burden must ultimately fall to Asia’s nations. China’s behavior, particularly its treatment of the poor Uighurs, has been abhorrent, there is no denying that. But it has never threatened America’s commercial or national security interests. America’s obsession with countering China has more to do with its own hegemonic ambitions than anything else and reinforces the argument that its leaders are no longer acting rationally.

The key takeaway: America’s finances will only worsen as it continues to fund a military designed to dominate the world rather than protect the homeland. Instead of taking the steps necessary to reign in spending, America’s leaders seem determined to do the same thing they did in Afghanistan; pretend like nothing is wrong until everything implodes in the blink of an eye.

The only real question is when, but no one can truly answer that. America is a large, wealthy country, making it hard to predict how far down this path it can go before reality rears its ugly head. If I were a betting man, I would wager the inflection point will correlate to the interest payments on its debt. Once this number reaches a certain level, America will be printing money to pay the interest on the money it has already borrowed and printed. It’s hard to predict the exact fallout but debasing a nation’s currency to pay its debts has never ended well for the many governments throughout history that have followed this path.

The rest of the world needs to prepare accordingly. Even in a weakened financial position, America’s massive military industrial infrastructure will still allow it to wreak havoc in many ways. Much like the demise of the Soviet Union flooded the world with its weapons, America’s decline will incentivize it to expand its role as the world’s merchant of death. Many of its weapons will end up in Israel, India, and Greece.

The leaders of Iran, Pakistan, and Turkey should take note. As I argued in a companion piece to the essay about America’s looming military withdrawal, these nations must come together to create new political, economic and military organizations for their mutual defense and prosperity. The key to doing so: creating institutional mechanisms to support trade and joint infrastructure development within the framework of a free trade zone like the one Europe built in the aftermath of WW2. Projects like the long-delayed Peace Pipeline between Iran and Pakistan would serve as the perfect building blocks to increase trade and connectivity.

Unfortunately, the Muslim world’s leaders are even more irrational and illogical than America’s. Despite centuries of conquest and instability, Muslim elites refuse to make the sort of changes that would allow them to prosper either individually or collectively. Pakistan, for example, seems intent on creating the same toxic and ineffective neo-colonial dynamic with China that has repeatedly failed Muslim societies since the Ottomans first tried the same tactic with Germany. Iran’s leaders are still obsessing over how Iranian women dress. One could write volumes about the irrational policies favored by Afghanistan’s rulers.

Like most of the Muslim world, all three suffer under the weight of authoritarian and non-responsive political and social systems that stifle change or serious attempts at reform. Consequently, they are highly unlikely to take the steps necessary to protect themselves from the chaos and upheaval that always accompanies major shifts in the world’s geopolitical sands. That is a pity, because America’s loosening grip on the region also means the time to do so has never been better.

Tagged : / / / / /