The Good Guy, Bad Guy Syndrome

By Dr S.M. Rahman

Franklin D. Roosevelt made a very profound statement in 1938. He said: “You cannot organize civilization around the core of militarism and at the same time expect reason to control human destiny.” This wisdom is lost on the Americans and there lies the reason why the world is turned into an arena of violence, terror and conflicts, as if God had ordained this planet called Earth to be an abode of the humans, to perpetually engage themselves in antagonistic struggle against each other and transform the planet into a killing field.

Anthropologists have differed that violence is an integral aspect of human existence. Freud, however, had propounded that human beings were endowed with two opposite instinctual predispositions – life instinct (Eros) and death instinct (Thanatos).

Einstein exchanged many letters with Freud and argued that humans have to learn to be violent and that peaceful co-existence could be achieved through effective learning. Freud was not convinced and he postulated his hypothesis of death instinct, similar to the Buddhist philosophy of ‘Nirvana’, which maintains that life ultimately seeks its own destruction. Even if it is accepted that aggression has an instinctual basis, it can be channelized towards productive ends. Even lions are trained to act against their ‘instinct’, and be friendly towards their trainers. Aggression, therefore, may seek its expression in sports activities – wrestling and boxing and a whole lot of other aggression catharsis activities.  

The western developed countries showed a predisposition for colonizing nations, who are endowed with nature’s gift of oil, gas and mineral resources, They are targeted for outright occupation (classical colonialism), or exercise control over them, through excessive military power and then subsequently install a regime of its own choice to serve as its stooge (neo-colonialism). Those who defy the invasion and put up a strong resistance are semantically degraded and stereotyped as “extremists, fanatics or terrorists.” They are typical ‘bad guys’.

Those who comply to serve all their demands are not only protected but are characterized as ‘good guys’ – “enlightened moderates” and often over-blown as great ‘statesmen’, the worst outcome being that the ‘lackeys’ accepting the implanted identities start behaving as if they are really very gifted and must pour out their ‘wisdom’ to the prestigious think-tanks and institutions – a prize for servility. This so called ‘good guy’ destroys the grace and dignity of every institution of his own country and rules with absolute power under the pretext of ‘Unity of Command’ and a mind set not different from that of Hitler and Stalin.

Killing innocent young female orphans in the name of anti-terrorism, without any moral qualms of conscience, is the attribute of this ‘good guy’ (General Pervez Musharraf). Moreover, pushing the country towards utter destabilization and squandering the wealth of the country for self aggrandizement, lavish living and frequent visits to the centres of global power to reassure his loyalty and this ironically is what is characterized as “good governance.” 

Prior to the Kerry-Lugar Bill, the military was patronized by the US establishment which practically hindered the emergence of a respectable political culture. This time, the design is reversed. The so called civilian government glued to shrewdly maneuvered NRO, constrained to obey any law enacted by the US Congress, and even eulogize it as a great diplomatic achievement, whereas to the perceptive analysts, it is nothing beyond a “treaty of Surrender”. It is the public perception.

What else matters in democracy? One wonders if USA establishment could accept such provisions in its own country, where mega corruption would be washed off under the so called ‘National Reconciliation Ordinance.

This is nothing but a reinforcement of all sorts of immoral acts, for the rapacious elites, while the accountability is only for the wretched of the earth, who have no links with the power-wielders in the society. What an irony that ‘Islamic’ Republic of Pakistan, accommodates such a discriminative provision, quite oblivious of the fact that the Constitution explicitly mentions congruous to the Objective Resolution that nothing would be enacted as law, which is repugnant for the tenants of ‘Deen’ and Sunnah.  

USA’s strategic demands on Pakistan have often been quite contradictory in nature. When the Russian invaded Afghanistan, the US had to avenge its defeat in Vietnam. The diehard Islamic Mujahideen were used to resist the aggression and Pakistan’s the then military ruler (General Ziaul Haq), very well known for his ‘fundamentalistic orientation to Islam, and incidentally, far different from the vision of the founders of the state, was a “good guy” for USA.

In order to extend his own tenure, the military ruler was all out to support whatever was demanded of him. The Mujahideen, the major chunk of who were the Taliban, were eulogized as “freedom fighters” Osama Bin Laden was not at all a ‘bad guy’ as long as he was supporting the Afghans resistance. 

After the Red Army had to quit the Afghan territory and the great Soviet Empire started disintegrating, the ‘Mujahideen’ who had played such a crucial role in the defeat of USA’s great rival power, their fate dramatically changed. No government was instituted where the freedom fighters could get their legitimate share. Nothing to fall back upon, internecine conflicts erupted and war lordism practically ruined all the institutions of stability.

Taliban were erroneously equated with Al-Qaeda. They are the ‘bad guys’, but those who are tormenting, humiliating and killing the Palestinians – the Israelis and the Indians in Held Kashmir, are not the recipient of any negative epithet. The former President of USA, George Bush even called Israel’s President Ariel Sharon an apostle of Peace.   

The ‘macho-national pride’ and rather exaggerated fear of being attacked by a contrived enemy and simplistic construct of “good guy/bad guy” are the main determinants of war. Every nation based on social constructionist point of view, builds an image of ‘self’, as a ‘good guy.’ These are essentially very narrow in nature but overly generalized as if they are absolute truths.

Perceptions are often faulty. Ralph White aptly remarks: “A more realistic perception of one’s nation and its potential antagonists, involving large departure from the stark ‘Good Guys’/Bad Guys caricature that presently is fastened by politicians, educators and the mass media, all of whose realize that their rapport with their publics depends partly on making the public feel good about themselves, with a general avoidance of any approval of their country’s opponents.” (Alternative Security, Ed. by Burns Weston p.177).

Demonization of Muslims is also a biased construct. Why are the Muslim countries the main target of the West? In fact, the real extremists and fanatics are the ‘evangelists’, the ‘neo-cons’ and the ‘Zionists’ who are far more dangerous than are the Al-Qaeda.  

Obama would do well to open a dialogue with the Taliban of Afghanistan and work out a respectable exist. Adding military strength will be counter-productive. The limits of militarism have been amply proven in Vietnam and Afghanistan. Transcending the construct like ‘War of Necessity’, Obama must accept the necessity for ‘engagement and diplomacy with adversaries.” That would justify the Nobel Prize he has earned.

Dr S M Rahman is Secretary General of FRIENDS,  a think tank headed by General Aslam Beg. Dr Rahman frequently writes for Opinion Maker.