By Yasmeen Ali
Two candidates for international independence movements? by ThisCantBeHappening
Pakistan parliamentarians should promptly table a resolution calling for efforts to carve the state of New Mexico away from the United States and to either make it independent, or restore it to its status prior to the Mexican-American War (1846-48), when it was a part of Mexico.
With New Mexico's population boasting the highest percentage of Latinos (estimated 46% in 2010) in the US, including descendants of Spanish Colonialists and recent immigrants from Latin America, and the highest percentage of Indigenous Americans (9.4%), US rule by the white-majority government in Washington over New Mexico may rightly be deemed as an alien, neocolonial occupation. The majority of Latinos, 83% of whom were born in New Mexico, share a Spanish and Native American ancestry, while the indigenous population is mostly Navajo, and trace their ancestry in the region back thousands of years to the pre-colonial era.
Of course, this proposal for the secession of New Mexico will be out rightly rejected by the US as an outrageous interference in American affairs and a threat to US sovereignty. The US, after all, has never believed in the motto ,"What's sauce for the goose is also sauce for the gander." Rather, the US acts like the proverbial elephant in a China Shop, causing horrific destruction in the name of democracy, human rights and other similar big sounding slogans. Except that this destruction has been completely selective! Not when it effects America's own interest. Or those of her "friends".
Alan Hart, commenting on the latest veto by Russia and China of a US-sponsored UN Security Council resolution calling for UN action against the Syrian government, wrote, ""how do we explain the fact that all the governments of the Western world, led by America, are on the wrong side of [this issue] because of their support for the Zionist state of Israel, right or wrong -- unending occupation, on-going ethnic cleansing and all? There is a one-word answer: Hypocrisy." He rightfully questions if is it good policy only if a nation agrees with Uncle Sam and bad policy if it does not?
Congressman Dana Rohrabacher (R-Calif.), who recently expressed support for an independent Baluchistan in an article, is to chair a meeting of the US Congress Committee on Foreign Affairs to deliberate upon this region of Pakistan which has been regularly targeted by US drone attacks, today. "Perhaps we should even consider support for a Baluchistan carved out of Pakistan to diminish radical power there (in Pakistan)," Rohrabacher has written.
There are signs that a London-led project to separate Baluchistan from Pakistan has been given some impetus. "The objectives of such a move are many: To weaken a belligerent Pakistan; to create a buffer between Pakistan and Afghanistan; to secure a strong foothold along the southeastern borders of Iran; and to undo China's long-term plan to link up the Karakoram Highway in the north to the Arabian Sea via a land bridge running through Baluchistan," says Ramtanu Maitra in his article Baluchistan: Is US backing Longon's plan to dismember Pakistan?
Selig Harrison, a self-described US expert on the region, in his article for The National Interest of 3rd Feb 2011, argues that an independent Baluchistan must be supported since Pakistan has given Gwader in the heart of Baluchistan to China, and therefore, an independent Baluchistan would support USA' s regional interests and counter Islamist forces . Exactly how the Islamist forces will be countered by an independent Baluchistan is left unclear.
The Obama Administration has identified two enemies; China and Iran. The latter, is being perceived as a potential nuclear threat (a perception erected with no facts to back it up), which has lead to a US-led campaign to impose harsh sanctions, isolating Iran etc. At the same time, the US has tried to open up a dialogue with the Taliban, who are mostly Wahabis, and are thus avowed opponents of majority Shia Iran, as another way counter this perceived threat. The Taliban could not have opened office in Qatar without a nod from US and UK. A likely eventual Taliban government in Kabul would also ensure an unfriendly Afghanistan on Iran's eastern border. Never discussed is the question of why a nuclear Israel, which reportedly has some 300 nuclear weapons, is not a threat to the world while a potentially nuclear Iran would be.
Baluchistan plays a strong role in China's future development as a regional super power, and potential global super power. Pakistan minus Baluchistan pulls the rug out from under China's feet!
Pakistani retired Brigadier Shaukat Qadir, in an article carried exclusively by the blog pakpotpourri2 titled Another Conspiracy Theory, quotes a person he simply states as X, whom he corresponded with regarding the role and involvement in US in Pakistan. He quotes this source as saying:
"The US has concluded that the Pakistan army is part of the problem, not the solution; and that the interests of the Pakistan army are not identical with those of Pakistan. Consequently, the US has decided that the Pakistan army has to be cut to size and, if in the process of doing so, the Pakistan army is destroyed, so be it. And, I agree"
The article was in context with what came to be known as the Memogate scandal.
USA has her own interests in the Region. Of that, there is no doubt.
The American elephant is planning to gate crash into another China Shop. This elephant must be stopped. It is simply wrong to claim that by virtue of being a super power, the US has the right to act super bully.