Re: Conversation with Tarek Ali
Good interview and thoughts but describing him has the greatest Pakistani intellictual, I am not sure about that. I had not heared of Tarek Ali before and I will try to read his book now. My first impression from the interview is that he seems to be a leftist who finds a way to blame US in most situations and is prone to beleive conspiracy theories like most Pakistanis.
About the interview, the things I did not agree with were:
1. His premise that Pakistan was created by the British as a reward for Muslim League for their support during WWII. I don't think it is quite that simple and crystal clear. While he is correct that the demand of Pakistan was initially a bargaining chip by Muslim League but he ignored that the movement took a life of its own and decisions taken by Congress leadership (to insist on dealing with all of India as one country, refusing state autonomy, and then accepting the partition, etc) and the decision by the British to move the liberation date by a year in haste to leave India and the emotional response of muslims of Hindu majority states to the idea of Pakistan played a part. In short, it was a complex situation and multiple reasons. Attributing it to one simple reason is not intellectually hosnest on Tarek's part.
His description of Bhutto's death being green lighted by US is only speculation on his part. While this is true that Bhutto was not in US's good books because of pursing the atom bomb and forming the OIC but their is no proof that US was behind the Jamaat led opposition movement against him or General Zia's coup against him. Indications are that US was nervous and unsure about Zia until the Soviet army intervention in Afghanistan.
He give Pakistan too much credit in forming and arming the Talibans and repeatedly described Taliban victories as the only victorious war by Pakistan Army. Independent accounts describe the Taliban movement as indegenous and and a natural successor to the corruption and loot of Mujahideen leaders (especially in Pashtun region by Hekmatyar). Hekmatyar was the favourite warlord of Pakistan army, ISI and Jamaat-e-Islami. Taliban actually took over his forces, his ammunition depots and his strongholds in their bid to take over Afghanistan and found people's support against Hekmatyar. Pakistan supported and armed them a little later. Later on the Taliban also took a life of their own, got intermixed/taken over by Al Qaida and Global Jehad movement. Pakistan was a player and supporter too but describing Taliban take over of Kabul as a victory by Pakistan Army is not accurate.
Pakistan Army's only victory was not the Taliban take over of Kabul. Perhaps, routing of Afghan army in Bajaur by Pakistan army can be described as the only decisive vicotry by Pakistan Army. It clearly put an end to the Pakhtunistan dream of Daud Khan. Pakistan army does have victories in some of the battles with India. Afterall it did win half of Kashmir in 1948 and have maintained an agressive posture in Kashmir since then.
His theory of US being involved in Afghanistan now because of a desire to establish bases around China and Iran and not because of the terrorist threat from the country is laughable and again without any proof. He is speculating about it withour offering any reason or proof.
Most of the other things in the interview and the gist of it, I agree with.