http://www.dailystarnews.com/200203/02/n2030202.htm#BODY4

India and Pakistan will tow the US line. There has been no public comment
from India on the "Hate of the Union", or on inhuman treatment of Afghan
POWs. New Delhi has completed its U-turn on autonomous policy-making. It is
endorsing Mr Bush's use of military force as the preferred instrument in
international relations. This cowboy-style militarism is unbecoming of a
civilised state. Instead of protesting, the Indian government is grovelling.

The United States is about to invade Iraq as part of its "global war on
terrorism". According to reports, it plans to topple President Saddam
Hussein through a ground-invasion with 200,000 troops. Its Central Command's
"forward" components have moved to the Gulf.

Characteristically, America's military plans are more advanced than
political ones. It is still confused about which ethnic group should replace
Mr Hussein: Kurds or Shias (a majority in Sunni-ruled Iraq).

The Kurdish option could create trouble in NATO ally Turkey. Supporting
Shias risks strengthening Iran, part of America's "Axis of Evil".

However, two things are clear. Iraq will make the Afghan war--with its
4,000-plus innocent civilian deaths, aggravated starvation of 5.5 million,
and inhuman detention of prisoners- look like a picnic.

In Afghanistan, US warplanes ran out of high-value targets within three
days. In semi developed Iraq, the fighting will be more intense, with high
civilian deaths.

Secondly, the US' unjust war will inflict incalculable harm upon global
peace and security.

The Saddam regime is autocratic and brutal. But it is not in serious breach
of any international law or treaty. It has not, unlike in 1990, invaded a
neighbouring state. It does not, unlike the Taliban, support a widespread
terrorist network.

Baghdad three years ago threw out United Nations inspectors. But the
inspections were, arguably, excessive and unlimited in space and time.
Inspectors could invade government offices, factories, even private
bedrooms--on mere suspicion, without warning.

Some inspections turned up evidence and material pertaining to Iraq's (very
primitive) nuclear programme and (its more advanced) chemical weapons
acquisition. But this happened between 1991 and 1994.

The materials were destroyed. There was little justification for continuing
with the inspections after this.

America's vengeful attitude towards Iraq on inspections is all the more
bizarre because it itself opposes a biological-weapons verification protocol
as the inspections would violate "industrial secrets".

Sanctions inflicted terrible suffering on non-combatant Iraqis. According to
conservative estimates, 350,000 children under 5 died. (This excludes
children over 5, or adults who died for want of food or medicine). For
former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, this terrible misery was
"worth the price".

Iraq's suffering was typical of US military interventions everywhere--some
120 in the past half-century. The coming war is being waged in a new global
post-Cold War situation, in which the US is not just the world's sole
superpower. It is a Hyperpower, wielding far more force than any nation in
history.

America's dominance is unalloyed and unchallenged. It is enforced less
through consensus than brute force. America has rarely practised any
diplomacy other than the gunboat variety.

America's gargantuan military budget equals the defence spending of the next
15 highest countries--combined.

The US alone has mastered a combination of military technologies:
precision-guided missiles and bombs deliverable from "safe" distances;
Special Operations groups with night-vision equipment; sophisticated, secure
communications; and the logistical ability--large transport aircraft and
200-plus military bases--to deploy troops in far-flung battlefields.

No one matches America's awe-inspiring arsenal of mass-destruction weapons.

US economic might too is unequalled, thanks to superiority in information
technology and biotechnology, and to the recent relative decline of Europe
and Japan.

America's might is built on great inequalities of wealth and income, and
poor social security. It has ecologically disastrous effects, including
global warming, deforestation, and oceanic pollution.

The combination of military and economic clout allows the US to take an
arrogant, imperious, unbalanced, unilateralist stand, and treat the world as
its global empire.

US ideologue and former National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski sums
up today's dominant vision: The world must consist of only two categories of
states, America's "vassals" and "tributaries".

The US must be free to pursue its interests without hindrance. It should
brook no restraint, respect no authority. It can abuse, manipulate, bypass
or simply ignore the United Nations, as it likes.

US policy is driven not by this or that interest, but by the overarching
goal of world domination. America's response to September 11 was to declare
war, not on a particular state, but on "global terrorism".

Mr Bush's "State of the Union" address means the US will continue to act
like a brigand. He theorised an "Axis of Evil", comprising North Korea, Iraq
and Iran. The least that term implies is mutual coordination. But North
Korea has little contact with the other two. And these are bitter rivals!

Mr Bush declared he would go into Phase-II of the "anti-terrorism" war. But
he also said, "I will not stand by as peril draws closer and closer, the US
will not permit the world's most dangerous regimes to threaten us with the
world's most destructive weapons".

Here, he wasn't talking about a war on "terrorism", but a series of larger
wars to stop the spread of mass-destruction weapons--a dangerous new
counter-proliferation doctrine.

Mr Bush's martial oration has drawn widespread criticism. The New York Times
said: "the application of power and intimidation has returned to the
forefront of American foreign policy." The Guardian called it the "Hate of
the Union" address.

Many governments have condemned it as unbalanced for reducing "all the
world's problems to terrorism". The European Union's Chris Patten said it
was "profoundly misguided". France's Lionel Jospin was equally scathing.

However, when push comes to shove, European governments may not actively
oppose the US' military plans. They are likely to be ambiguous.

India and Pakistan won't even be ambiguous. They will tow the US line. There
has been no public comment from India on the "Hate of the Union", or on
inhuman treatment of Afghan POWs.

New Delhi has completed its U-turn on autonomous policy-making. It is
endorsing Mr Bush's use of military force as the preferred instrument in
international relations.

This cowboy-style militarism is unbecoming of a civilised state. Instead of
protesting, the Indian government is grovelling.

Praful Bidwai is an eminent Indian columnist.