Goodness begets goodness; evil begets evil. This is not a cliche, but grim reality. Indira Gandhi thought she was clever and sought to use Bhindranwale, a notorious terrorist, against her political opponents in Punjab and it is common knowledge with what tragic results.

Whether in politics, domestic or international or in our day-to-day existence, resorting to wrong tactics to make some temporary gains will invariably rebound to the evil-doer's disadvantage. Politicians think they can get away with anything. Time and again they have been proved wrong. In order to drive the then Soviet presence in Afghanistan, the United States encouraged Pakistan to train and equip religious terrorists, especially the notorious Taliban. The United States, of course, succeeded. But now they are paying for their folly.

The very people who were trained by Pakistan with the active financial and moral support of the United States are turning against their patrons. We might say that it serves them right, but the trouble is that the Taliban and Al Qaeda terrorists are also turning their attention towards India with jehadi intent and fervour. India will handle them, but at considerable price.

But it is Musharraf who is now finding it hard to deal with the situation. The United States is shameless. It has no moral or ethical values. Its sole aim is its security and the preservation of its standing as a Super Power.

The Pakistani leadership thought that it was clever in using its "friendship" with the United States for its own nefarious purposes. Now the United States finds itself in a dilemma. Should it continue to support Musharraf or should it dump him? Washington will have no hesitation in dumping the Pakistan President.

Indeed, according to the wellinformed New York Times the U. S. Vice President was rushed to Islamabad without warning to read the riot act to Musharraf. Vice President apparently told Musharraf that he either gets things done or face the consequences. An U.S. Official has been quoted as saying that Musharraf has "made a number of assurances over the past few months but the bottom line is that what they are doing is not working".

The problem for Washington is that it is damned if it throws out Musharraf and damned if it doesn't. Dethroning Musharraf isn't all that easy. But no one is sure of how the Pakistani Army leadership thinks. Who can succeed Musharraf if he is eliminated? Will it be another General?

Can it be Benazir Bhutto who is now increasingly getting into the news? In early March President Bush said openly that US forces are conducting hot pursuits of terrorists into Pakistani territory and will continue to do so. Washington couldn't care less for Pakistani sensibilities.

A high-ranking US military official told a US Senate Committee that American forces on Afghanistan's eastern border are routinely firing upon and pursuing Taliban enemies into Pakistan. Musharraf has had no option but to take orders from Washington. He managed to get a senior Taliban Commander, Mullah Obaidullah Akhund arrested in Quetta. Musharraf had no alibis to present.

According to report, the CIA Deputy Director of Operations, Stephen Kappes presented convincing evidence of Al Qaeda resurgence in Pakistan to Musharraf. He had to listen and yet Washington is in two minds.

President Bush apparently believes contrary to the advice of experts that Musharraf is acting in the best interests of both his country and the US and reports suggest that US Officials too at least a major section among them want to continue to back the Musharraf regime without a trace of embarrassment.

The Washington Post questioned this editorially, maintaining that "far from leading Pakistan towards democracy, Musharraf is systematically dismantling liberal and secular institutions in a country already threatened by Islamic extremism". The Post had a case; was it not Musharraf who suspended the Chief Justice of the Pakistan Supreme Court, Iftikar Mohammad Chaudhury? Was it not the Pakistani police who stormed the Lahore High Court premises and used tear gas to disperse lawyers? But instead of seeing reason, Musharraf only saw a conspiracy to overthrow him. This has not convinced the international media which has condemned him in no uncertain terms.

But Musharraf is obviously playing a clever balancing act. He not only wants to be seen as a friend of the US, he seems equally willing not to offend India too much and has been quoted as saying that "ties with India have been never so good" as at present.

India, needless to say is not going to be so easily taken in by these honeyed words but in order to survive, Musharraf cannot afford to have enemies both inside and outside. Pakistan themselves are not sure where the US stands.

As Pervez Hoodnhoy, who teaches to Quaid-e-Azam University wrote the other day; "One might have expected the Americans to know better than to bet all on a man who might be gone tomorrow. But beyond pumping in dollars and supporting Musharraf and his military, the US appears clueless dealing with Pakistan and its problems of social development".

The United States has never ever understood South Asia, let alone Pakistan. Its short-sightedness has been apparent right from the days of President Eisenhower.

When a country behaves solely in its own interests without caring for what damage it could do its allies, trouble for allies is an expected consequence, and Pakistan is realising it painfully.

For Musharraf survival is the only option. His life won't be worth a penny, if he loses power and he knows it only too well. In the circumstances he has been acting ruthlessly. Hardline Islamists, once in great favour are now out and it is claimed thatsoldiers charged with mutiny of which so little is known in the Indian media have received the death penalty. But one thing is now clear; Musharraf is now under close American watch. Every action of his is now under close scrutiny.

India has no use for him, but will continue to do business with him, considering that there is no alternative. That is a sound policy. Always, a known devil is better than a unknown devil; what is clear is that India, like everyone else, has only to wait and see. It is annoying and frustrating, but inevitable. Is the infructuous lawyers' `rebellion' a symbol of popular unrest in the whole of Pakistan?

There is no study available. What seems obvious is that Musharraf is slipping and his long reign of nine years has brought no peace either to Pakistan, India, Afghanistan or the United States of America. And that is worth pondering upon.

Courtesy: www.samachar.com, March 28, 2007