American Imperialism in Post 9/11 Era: Perspective from

Pakistan

Dr. Talat Shabbir*

Abstract

This paper examines the theory of structural imperialism advanced by Johan

Galtung which has remarkable relevance for relatons between United States

and Pakistan. In the 18^th and 19^th centuries, economically and militarily powerful

European states had huge empires across the globe and exercised considerable

politcal and economic influence over Africa and Asia. Afer World War II, imperial

powers lost their control over their empires and the naton states became

independent politcal enttes. The world in the post war era was divided between

the East, spearheaded by the Soviet Union, and the West led by the United States,

giving birth to the cold war between both the super powers. The United States

and the USSR began to dominate the divided world primarily due to military and

economic superiority. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, the US became the

sole power and it contnues to pursue imperialistc dominance in the world. This

paper examines American imperialism in the post 9/11 scenario and discusses

the perspectve of Pakistan in the light of centre-periphery facet argued by Johan

Galtung in his structural theory of imperialism.

Keywords: Pakistan, United States, Imperialism, Structural Theory

^* Dr Talat Shabbir is Director China Pakistan Study Centre at Insttute of Strategic Studies.

Vol. 2, No. 2, December 2019

Stratagem

Introducton

Imperialism largely refers to the relatonship among the states in which

some of the states acquire stronger politcal, diplomatc and economic

clout and some do not enjoy relatve stronger positon in economic and

politcal terms. Consequently, the states at the positon of strength expand

their politcal and economic influence over the weaker states. Imperialism,

thus, refers to a relatonship of dominaton and subordinaton that exists

between stronger states and weaker states. A noted scholar Edward

Said argues in his work “Culture and Imperialism” that imperialism is a

practce or attude of a dominatng or influental stronger centre over a

distant territory. This dominaton may not be a direct dominaton, but it

carries cultural, politcal, ideological, and social impacts for the dominated

naton.1 Imperialism therefore refers to unequal relatonship that may

have a direct or less direct control or influence by the dominatng state.

American imperialism is no excepton to it.

Thomas Weisskopf is his artcle

“Theories of American

Imperialism: A Critcal Evaluaton” identfies various motves behind

American imperialistc designs. There are, in his view, motves that the

United States pursues for imperialistc influence around the world and

natonal security and macroeconomic prosperity top the list. In order

to safeguard natonal and economic interests, the United States has

consistently confronted potental rivals in the world. American military

interventons and diplomatc accesses around the globe are justfied on

the pretext of natonal security and economic interests. In fact, American

natonal security interests promote its macroeconomic interests in the

world. Though many scholars in America think that imperialism is not the

only way to prosperity, but imperialist actvites will potentally remain

motvated by economic interests and that will contnue to drive the United

States towards imperialistc policies to pursue natonal interests.2

¹ Edward W. Said, Culture and Imperialism (Vintage, 1993).

² Thomas Weisskopf, “Theories of American Imperialism: A Critcal Evaluaton,” Review of Radical

Politcal Economics 6, no. 3 (1974): 41-60.

Vol. 2, No. 2, December 2019

American Imperialism in Post 9/11 Era: Perspectve from Pakistan

The origin of American imperialism dates back to the late 19th

century, when the US had developed economic clout but could not

militarily assert it overseas. The US military power did not match that

of the Britsh who had five tmes bigger army and 10 tmes bigger Navy

than the US. In fact, the US in the beginning was not very keen to expand

its influence overseas for ideological reasons. There existed a different

opinion in the American thought process. Moralists in America thought

it was not fair to violate a principle of consent and the US should not

interfere in the affairs of sovereign states. On the contrary, the younger

generaton believed that the US had a responsibility to expand its sphere

of influence and carry out the duty of uplifing the societes of the world.

Again, the European initatve in the late 19^th century of capturing nearly

10 million square miles of land in Africa and Asia sparked expansionist

desire in policy making circles in America.

In America’s quest for imperialism, there are four schools of

thought. One of the proponents of the first school of thought is Henry

Cabot Lodge who said: ‘United States must expand to compete.” The

“America should become a power of peace’ is the second school of

thought and one of the leading figures of this school is Carl Schurz. The

third school of thought is based on Josiah Strong’s asserton that “America

should spread Anglo-Saxon civilizaton’ and the fourth school of thought

led by Alfred Mahan, stated that ‘the US must become a great Sea power.”

³ In all four schools of thought, expansion is an underlying asserton.

The US is an example of imperialist power today. With a view to

achieve ascendancy over the world, it maintains huge military arsenals

and maintains nearly 400 military bases around the globe. With the

display of military prowess, the US coerces smaller and weaker countries

to see the world through their lenses and agree to the US world view. As

a global leader or policeman, the US believes that it has the legitmacy to

mobilise forces on foreign lands at will with a view to secure its natonal

³ Kenneth C. Davis, Don’t Know Much about History: Everything You Need to Know about American

History but Never Learned (Harper Collins, 2003).

Vol. 2, No. 2, December 2019

Stratagem

interests. Dominant imperialistc powers want every other country to fear

them. As already mentoned, imperialistc influence and super power

syndrome gives birth to unequal relatons among states. This aspect has

been highlighted by Johan Galtung in his theory of structural imperialism.

He also refers to inequality and its persistence that divides the world

into centre and periphery regions. The US-Pakistan relatons shall also be

analysed in view of centre-periphery facet advanced by Galtung.

Imperialism: Theoretcal Construct

Though this paper would primarily focus on Johan Galtung’s theory

of imperialism, it would also look at works of scholars who explained

imperialism in their writngs, so that a wider view is obtained. While

explaining the theory of imperialism, important works by John Atkinson

Hobson (1858-1940) and Vladimir Lenin (1870-1924) are worth reviewing

as they explained outlines of imperialism. Both are considered the

leading thinkers and pioneers of the concept of imperialism. These

writers have analysed imperialism from their own perspectves and

gave out explanatons to prove their viewpoints. Hobson argues that

“financial motvaton” is an important factor for imperialism. He thinks

that the logic of expansionism, which is the hallmark of imperialism, is

constructed through controlled media. And media as a mater of fact

creates justficatons for the conquest or expansion. At the end, yields

of conquest go to the elites who have the benefits of higher returns.4

Imperialism, therefore, remains to be an expansionist and exploitatve

array. While explaining Hobson’s imperialism, Herman Schwartz refers to

it as a competton among the states and the states pursue expansion of

their power to gain control of existng or new market potentals. Opposed

to colonialism, it affects existng natons and does not create new ones.5

When Hobson was compiling his work on imperialism, there were

⁴ John Atkinson Hobson, Imperialism: A Study, vol. 3 (Spokesman Books, 1938),

⁵ Herman Schwartz, “Hobson’s Voice: American Internatonalism, Asian Development, and Global

Macroeconomic Imbalances,” Journal of Post Keynesian Economics 25, no. 2 (2002): 331-51.

Vol. 2, No. 2, December 2019

American Imperialism in Post 9/11 Era: Perspectve from Pakistan

two major features of internatonal politcs. First, there existed several

empires, essentally European empires which were in competton with

one another, and which stretched across the world. Secondly, there was

predominance of finance capital over mercantle capital.6 His work was

largely influenced by the way various forms of imperialism worked across

the world. His descripton of various forms of imperialism manifest that he

had keenly observed the way imperial powers exploited the weaker states.

Hobson described four forms of imperialism which include colonialism

(expansion of naton and state), formal imperialism (expansion of state’s

politcal power without simultaneous expansion of the naton), informal

imperialism (internatonalism or a conflict between firms and individuals

mediated through markets) and imperialism (state expanding power for

control over markets in anarchic environments).7

Lenin referred to Hobson’s work and was greatly influenced by

him, but their viewpoints were diverse as were their worldviews. There

is a general belief that Hobson and Lenin shared common viewpoint on

imperialism and its exploitatve nature, but they did not. Hobson was

not a Marxist and never considered imperialism as an ultmate phase

of capitalism the way Lenin did. Lenin views imperialism as “monopoly

capitalism, parasitc, or decaying capitalism, and moribund capitalism.”8 In

his opinion, the period from 1898 to 1914 was significant for imperialism

to take shape. These were the tmes of wars and economic crisis, i.e. the

Spanish-American War (1898), the Anglo-Boer War (1899-1902), the

Russo-Japanese War (1904-05) and the economic crisis in Europe in 1900

were major developments of the tme. These were the landmarks for

history and imperialism.9 The turn of the 20^th century, in his view, was the

tme when capitalism’s transiton went into the final stage that he argued

⁶ Joel Krieger and Margaret E. Crahan, The Oxford Companion to Politcs of the World (Oxford University

Press, 2001),

⁷ Schwartz, “Hobson’s Voice.”

⁸ V. I. Lenin, Imperialism and the Split in Socialism. Marxists Internet Archive. Retrieved April 19, 2011,

1916.

⁹ Ibid.

Vol. 2, No. 2, December 2019

Stratagem

in his works.10

Galtung’s work on imperialism is of enormous significance. He

focused on the structure of imperialism. Inequality, he argues is the basis

of imperialism. Inequality among the individuals and natons is the central

theme of Galtung’s structural theory of imperialism. He talks of inequality

within and between the natons.11 The similar argument was advanced by

Dr. Mahbub ul Haq when he said that describing the world as one global

society was inappropriate. There existed two enttes and two different

worlds. One is “embarrassingly rich” and the other is “desperately poor.”12

Galtung talks of inequality within and between the natons where as Dr.

Mahbub ul Haq refers to inequality between the natons that has divided

the world in two different planets, two dissimilar humanites and two

diverse global societes being different from each other.

Galtung refers to the patern of inequality in the world that

divides the world into centre and periphery and each of them has a centre

and periphery in them. Five prepositons emerge from this patern. There

is an inequality between the centre of the centre and the centre of the

periphery. There is an inequality between the centre of the centre and the

periphery of the centre. There is an inequality between the centre of the

periphery and the periphery of the periphery. There also exist disparity

between the periphery of the centre and the periphery of the periphery.

Both the peripheries have common status in their own spheres.

Before examining American imperialism with specific reference

to developments taking place afer the events of 9/11, it is appropriate

to analyse various aspects of Galtung’s structural theory of imperialism

that are related to the scope of this paper. Galtung is of the view that the

concepton of dominant relatons between various collectvites are due

to the tremendous inequality that exists within and between the natons.

¹⁰ Ibid.

¹¹ Johan Galtung, “A Structural Theory of Imperialism,” Journal of Peace Research, 1971, 81-117.

¹² Dr. Mahbub ul Haq, “Towards a More Compassionate Society,” in Global Issues, 1997.

Vol. 2, No. 2, December 2019

American Imperialism in Post 9/11 Era: Perspectve from Pakistan

He refers to it as “sophistcated” relaton13 that divides a naton into

two collectvites or two virtual enttes that confront each other. These

enttes begin to have disharmony of interests that result in a structure

of exploitaton of the weaker entty by the stronger. The sophistcated

relaton creates an exploitatve array in which the stronger entty exploits

the weaker entty.

Harmony of interests and disharmony of interests that stem from

this relatonship are differentated by living conditons. If the living conditon

gap between the two collectvites increases it will be called disharmony

of interests and if the living conditon gap among the enttes decreases,

it will be termed as harmony of interests. The dominance relaton there

is characterised by the living conditon of a collectvity. Collectvity having

a superior living conditon will be referred to as dominant collectvity.

Imperialism is a relaton between centre and periphery natons that

may be described in these assumptons: 1) “there is harmony of interest

between the centre in the centre and the centre in the periphery naton;

2) there is more disharmony of interests within the periphery naton than

within the centre naton; and 3) there is disharmony of interest between

the periphery in the centre naton and the periphery in the periphery

naton.”14 These assumptons shall explain the relaton of two states.

Core and periphery regions have also been referred to by Immanuel

Wallerstein in his world system theory. According to the world system

theory, division of labour brings into being, two mutually interdependent

regions. These regions are “core” and “periphery.” Advanced and wealthy

natons are “core,” whereas, weak and poor natons fall in the category of

“periphery,”15 Galtung too structures his theory of imperialism on centre

and periphery. The model that emerges out of Galtung’s theory is centre-

periphery relatons. There exists a structure of centre and periphery

¹³ Galtung, “A Structural Theory of Imperialism.”

¹⁴ Ibid.

¹⁵ Carlos A. Martnez-Vela, “World Systems Theory,” Engineering System Division 83 (2001): 1-5.

Vol. 2, No. 2, December 2019

Stratagem

in which elite or policy makers in stronger naton (centre) form part of

“centre” whereas those who are not part of ruling elite or policymakers or

who do not have impact on decisions of the centre are part of “periphery.”

Similar kind of structure exists in the weaker naton (periphery). There too

exist elite and policymakers referred to as centre of the periphery and

a large segment of the periphery naton are not part of policy making

process and are the periphery of periphery.

For a clearer understanding of Galtung’s facets of imperialism’s

structure, the US in this paper shall be referred to as “centre” and Pakistan

shall be referred to as “periphery.” The US ruling elite forms “centre” of

the “centre” and the US general public or masses are “periphery” of the

‘centre.” Whereas, the Pakistani ruling elite is “centre” of the “periphery”

and general public is “periphery” of the “periphery.” Galtung’s three

assumptons reflect three different frameworks. Firstly, the harmony of

interests between centre of the centre and centre of the periphery means

there is a harmony between the US ruling elites and Pakistani ruling elites.

Secondly, there exists more disharmony of interests within the periphery

naton (Pakistan) than within the centre naton (US). Thirdly, disharmony

of interests between periphery (masses or general public in the US) in the

centre naton and periphery (masses or general public in Pakistan) in the

periphery naton exists. The centre-periphery facets of this theory and

above referred assumptons shall be substantated with several evidences

in the subsequent sectons of the paper.

Imperialism: An Overview

To begin with, imperialism gives an identcal impression of an empire,

but these two expressions have different shades of undertone. The word

empire is derived from Latn term “imperium” that means “sovereignty

or rule” and in Roman the word referrs to waging of war, making of laws

and implementng them.16 This implies the state’s capacity to make laws

within a territory. With expansion in the size of the state, imperium

¹⁶ Stephen Howe, Empire: A Very Short Introducton (Oxford University Press, 2002),

Vol. 2, No. 2, December 2019

American Imperialism in Post 9/11 Era: Perspectve from Pakistan

became Imperium, denotng “rule over extensive, far flung territories, far

beyond the original home land of rulers.”17 In the light of this explanaton,

imperialism is about “processes” whereas empire is “maintained and

expanded.” The term imperialism thus came to be used in the 19^th century

for policies of expansionism advanced by France and Britain. Imperialism

therefore refers to direct conquest of a territory or through politcal or

economic influence that amount to similar kind of dominaton.18 On

occasions, the terms colonialism and imperialism are also used in the

similar meaning or interchangeably, but in fact, they are not the same.

Imperialism refers to the control of the weak by the rich and powerful,

not necessarily by means of the exercise of direct authority.’19 Colonialism

however refers to the process of acquiring and maintaining the territories

and goods through conquest.20

The scholars have different viewpoints as to how imperialism works.

Some scholars evaluate imperialism in economic terms in internatonal

economic order whereas others call it a politco-military phrase. In order

to understand the concept of imperialism, it is appropriate to refer to

various writers and scholars. David Robertson explains imperialism as a

“policy or goal of extending the power and rule of government beyond

the boundaries of its original state and taking into one politcal unit.”21

It is the relatonship between the stronger states and the weaker states

on the terms decided by the powerful statse. The imperial states pursue

their policies effectvely dominatng the weaker for various domestc,

regional and internatonal objectves. Most of the tme, the weaker states

find themselves unable to act for their concerns or atain their natonal

objectves. The ability of weaker states to pursue their natonal interests

¹⁷ Ray Kiely, Rethinking Imperialism (Palgrave Macmillan, 2010),

¹⁸ Ibid.

¹⁹ Jeffrey C. Stone, “Imperialism, Colonialism and Cartography,” Transactons of the Insttute of Britsh

Geographers, 1988, 57-64.

²⁰ Ania Loomba, Colonialism/postcolonialism (Routledge, 2015),

²¹ David Robertson, A Dictonary of Modern Politcs (Psychology Press, 2002),

Vol. 2, No. 2, December 2019

Stratagem

becomes limited or restricted.22 Even if powerful states do not extend their

physical control over weaker states beyond their original territories, they

exercise substantal economic and politcal influence over the weaker

states.

Internatonal politcs, as we know, is marked by the relatons of

the states. The relatons are described in terms of stronger or weaker

countries and defined by economic, politcal and military strength the

states enjoy. During the 18^th and 19^th centuries, various global powers

partcularly European states, strived to gain dominaton over poor and

weaker states. The states atained this influence through military means

and subsequently exercised their influence by affectng internal as well as

foreign policies of weaker states. It gave rise to a kind of relatons in which

the powerful state emerged as dominant and the weaker states became

subservient. The nature of dominance varied from politcal to military to

economic to cultural. In this context, it is important to understand the

two distnct imperialistc models. One is Britsh imperialistc model and

the other is American imperialistc model. The Britsh Empire for which

a famous phrase “the empire on which the sun never sets” was coined,

traces its imperialistc origin to 16^th century. In contrast, the American

empire which was different in character from that of the Britsh Empire

dates back to the mid-19^th century.

The Britsh imperialistc model was in vogue in the 18^th and 19^th

centuries when the Britsh Empire extended across the world. In 1900,

the Britsh Empire was spread over one fifh of the globe and 400 million

people belonging to various faiths and ethnicites were subjects of the

Britsh Empire. The Britsh Empire had 60 dependencies with 3.2 million

square miles of area with the Indian sub-contnent consistng of two

million square miles and 322 million people. Additonally, the Britsh

Empire had five dominions covering 7.6 million square miles of area and

²² Tony Smith, The Patern of Imperialism: The United States, Great Britan and the Late-Industrializing

World Since

1815

(CUP Archive,

1981), htp://books.google.com.pk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=-

DM4AAAAIAAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PR9&dq=Smith,+Tony.+The+Pattern+of+Imperialism:&ots=S_

DWjP9Lbz&sig=2L2t6F15-t4hOUS5EhcWm-8V6r4.

Vol. 2, No. 2, December 2019

American Imperialism in Post 9/11 Era: Perspectve from Pakistan

24 million subjects.23 There was a racial aspect to imperialism too and

it was projected by the expressions “the White Man’s Burden” advanced

by a Britsh novelist and poet Rudyard Kipling in an artcle published in

February 1899 in McClure’s Magazine. J. A. Hobson also supports this

racial argument when he states: “It is desirable that the earth should be

peopled, governed, and developed, as far as possible, by the races which

can do this work best, i.e. by the races of highest social efficiency.”24

When we refer to the Britsh model, we in fact focus on the Britsh

colonial empire established by the Great Britain. However, imperialism in

true sense of the word may not be confused with colonialism as the Britsh

Empire colonised large parts of the world and exercised influence through

direct and indirect means. Imperialism “operates from the centre, it is a

state policy and is developed for ideological as well as financial reasons

whereas colonialism is nothing more than development for setlement or

commercial intentons.”25 Imperialism refers to dominance that does not

necessitate the direct management of dominance, whereas colonialism

refers to direct or physical involvement or establishing colonies to exercise

control. So ideally, colonialism has the flavour of imperialism but imperial

power does not necessarily require having a colony to exercise dominance

or control where dominance has physical dimension.

In the contemporary tmes, we live in the world of American

imperialism. There are various imperialistc models that are striving

parallel to American model. China is economically and militarily rising

and desires to dominate the regional and global politcs. Russia is striving

to reclaim its imperialistc grandeur that it once boasted. The European

Union as a politcal dispensaton looks forward to dominant sphere

of influence. The developed countries are building up their capacity as

military and economic powers to realise their imperialistc aspiratons. The

American imperialism, however, is visible and present. The US emerged as

²³ Rob Johnson, Britsh Imperialism (Palgrave Macmillan, 2002),

²⁴ Hobson, Imperialism.

²⁵ Carolyn Gallaher et al., Key Concepts in Politcal Geography (Sage, 2009),

Vol. 2, No. 2, December 2019

Stratagem

imperial power afer World War II and has assumed assertve clout afer

the collapse of the Soviet Union. The US has its “influence and power”

that is making an economic, military and cultural impact on the globe.

While many developed countries and rising economies are striving for

powerful stature in order to expand spheres of influence, but American

imperialism exists as a part of the world politcs and a relevant concept of

today’s internatonal politcs.

Imperialism has undoubtedly existed in one form or another for

a long tme, but it took deeper roots during the late 18^th and early 19^th

centuries, when the UK, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, and the US emerged

as imperial powers. The World War II put heavy economic strains on the

imperial powers that resulted in loss of their grip over colonies and states.

Afer the war, a bipolar world emerged and then began a clash of spheres

of influence between the West (US) and the East (USSR). With the collapse

of the Soviet Union, the US began to wield unipolar sphere of influence and

contnue striving to control the world through ruthless dominaton. The

US spends huge sum of money to maintain forces worldwide. According to

findings that have been substantated by the Council on Foreign Relatons,

the US military spending stands at 39% of total global spending by 2015.26

The presence of US military in 46 countries with 190,000 US troops and

115,000 civilian employees, manning 909 military facilites is a striking

indicator of the extent of imperialism that the US advances.27

In the post-World War II era, the American empire has emerged

in a peculiarly forceful way. The American economic, politcal and

cultural imperialism has gripped not only the developing world but

also the developed world. Being aware of the onslaught, a kind of

resistance to American imperial ambitons has been making impact on

politcal, economic, and cultural spheres. Rob Kroes argues that “politcal

imperialism promotes economic imperialism and economic imperialism is

²⁶ Dinah Walker, “Trends in US Military Spending,” 2013, htp://www.cfr.org/content/publicatons/

atachments/Trends%20in%20US%20Military%20Spending%202013.pdf.

²⁷ Catherine Lutz and Cynthia Enloe, The Bases of Empire: The Global Struggle against US Military Posts

(NYU Press, 2009),

Vol. 2, No. 2, December 2019

American Imperialism in Post 9/11 Era: Perspectve from Pakistan

translated into cultural imperialism.”28 The developing world has economic

constraints and its economic constraints are exploited to strengthen the

hold of politcal imperialism. The US has been using its imperialistc clout

because of the superiority of politcal and economic stature and contnues

to exploit weaker states.

American imperialistc designs in Asia

The 20^th century marks the dominaton of European powers over world

resources and politcal affairs. There was a commercial raison d'être of this

dominaton besides, white man’s burden and professed duty toward the

less privileged and underdeveloped world. English imperialism dominated

the vast foreign territories and had atained the status of biggest empire

in politcal history. Events leading to World War II marked an end to

classical imperialism. The war set the stage for the demise of European

and specifically Britsh imperialism and gave rise to natonalism in Asia

where independent states emerged following the devastatng war. The

era of de-colonisaton that began afer the war was the era when the US

began to increase its influence not only in Europe (owing to their economic

hardship) but also in various other parts of the world including Asia. The

Soviet Union was post war challenger of the US because it also began

to form alliances and forge collaboratons with states it could dominate

or states having communist’s penchant. The Soviet Union’s proximity to

South Asia was the reason that the region gained significance in the chess

board of cold war.

In the post war internatonal scenario, American imperialism

was for the most part vulnerable because of communist ideology . The

communist ideology and aggressive behaviour of the Soviet leaders was a

major US apprehension. During the cold war, the US policymakers seemed

poised to lessen the power and influence of Soviet Union in order to limit

its threat to internatonal peace and stability. The US incessantly worked

²⁸ Rob Kroes, “American Empire and Cultural Imperialism: A View from the Receiving End,” Diplomatc

History 23, no. 3 (1999): 463-77.

Vol. 2, No. 2, December 2019

Stratagem

to keep conduct of Soviet Union in accordance with the purposes of

United Natons Charter. There is another aspect of US-USSR confrontaton:

Soviet communism was considered an alternatng ideology to American

capitalism. The Soviet Union, therefore was not only an economic or

military rival of the US but it posed meaningful threat to the concept and

practce of capitalism as an internatonal social, economic and politcal

order. Soviet Union’s collapse changed internatonal scenario. With the

collapse of communism as an ideology and dismemberment of the Soviet

Union, new coalitons, and politcal readjustment surfaced.

China, afer the collapse of the Soviet Union, remains a credible

challenge to American imperialism in the South Asian region. It is

two decades from now that China is likely to outdo the US economy.

Growing fast in ataining military potentals, China is expected to defy

the US dominaton in the region. China is perceived as a threat to the

US imperialism around the globe. Major indicators that substantate this

speculaton are its significant geographical locaton, pace at which its

economy is growing and increasing military strength. China has been very

cautous in achieving its objectves. It does not seem to be hurriedly and

aggressively pursuing its goals. Unlike the US, it has been successful in

projectng itself as a benevolent and caring power in the world, working

for mutual cooperaton and benefit.

In view of its imperial ambitons in South Asia and beyond, the US

has envisaged a stronger military presence in the region from where it can

atain its objectves. 9/11 offered an opportunity and a sort of justficaton

for interventon in South Asia and Muslim Arab world in partcular. A

swif conclusion that Al-Qaeda based in Afghanistan is responsible for the

catastrophe of the 9/11 was reached by the US policymakers. In a way,

Al-Qaeda did offer a helping hand, in the words of Ugo Matei, for the

“Constructon of foe.”29 Mythical constructon of foe was an imperatve to

take military measurers and subsequent regime change in Afghanistan.

²⁹ Ugo Matei, “A Theory of Imperial Law: A Study on US Hegemony and the Latn Resistance,” Global

Jurist Fronters 3, no. 2 (2003),

Vol. 2, No. 2, December 2019

American Imperialism in Post 9/11 Era: Perspectve from Pakistan

While explaining imperialism in the complex region, politcs of

regional and global players need to be analysed. There are three major

stakeholders in the region - global and regional players and important

states. Russia was a US compettor during the cold war and it stll carries

enormous politcal weight. China is now emerging as a fast-growing

economy and US rival in global as well as regional spheres. India has

regional stature but aspires to atain regional hegemony and become a

global entty. Being a nuclear state, Pakistan poses challenge to Indian

dominaton in the region. Oil and gas rich Central Asian Republics (CAR)

are also significant for the Imperial power. The United States wants to

dominate South Asia and Central Asia in order to contain China and limit

the role of Russia. The US views Shanghai Cooperaton Organisaton (SCO)

with deep concern. In US perspectve, this alliance has been advanced

by China, Russia, and the Central Asian states with a view to limit the US

imperialism in the region. The US supports and befriends India to contain

China’s growing influence and assist in realising other objectves in the

region. Pakistan is also a reluctant collaborator of the US imperialistc

agenda.

American Imperialism: Pakistan’s Perspectve

The purpose of giving a detailed account of imperialism was to have an

understanding of how imperialism works at global and regional level.

Though this paper does not focus on bilateral (US-Pakistan context)

dimension of imperialism, it focuses on theoretcal and conceptual

dimension of imperialism, but it was necessary to have a larger picture in

view. It focuses on how an imperial power engages with a state bilaterally

to acquire its compliance to the set objectves. Following the catastrophe

of 9/11, Pakistan became an important frontline ally in the war on

terror. In order to get absolute compliance to the US goals, Pakistan was

dubbed as fountainhead of terrorism and a country that provides safe

sanctuaries to the most sought-afer terrorists. Faced with the threat of

becoming a terror sponsoring state, Pakistan fell in line with the US albeit

Vol. 2, No. 2, December 2019

Stratagem

as a reluctant collaborator. A decade down the line, Pakistan is faced with

two-fold dilemma. It has a relaton of misgivings with the US and faces a

severe domestc backlash for becoming US surrogate. Resultantly, public

sentment has enormously turned against the US. In the process, the US

was able to achieve its imperialistc objectves of gaining a foothold in the

region in general and in Afghanistan in partcular. The US was able to limit

Al-Qaeda and maintain strong military presence in an area from where

it can oversee resource rich Central Asia, economically rising China and

aspiring compettor Russia.

Bilateral framework of imperialism has an explanaton in Galtung’s

structural theory of imperialism. The US-Pakistan relatons in the context

of centre-periphery relatons also give some useful details. Galtung

says that “imperialism is a dominance relaton between collectvites

partcularly between natons.”30 The relaton between the US and Pakistan

can be described as a sort of patron-client relatonship for large part of

their bilateral relatonship. Consequently, the economic, military, and

cultural imperial onslaught of the US subsequently flooded in. 9/11 gave

an impetus to the existng imperialism.

Soon afer 9/11, the Pakistani leadership was coerced by the US

officials to cooperate with its military forces that were set to launch an

offensive against the defiant Taliban government. Pakistan readily agreed

to extend all possible assistance required. Pakistan instantly made changes

in its Afghan policy. It made a diplomatc reversal of what it was pursuing

with regards to Afghanistan and re-aligned with the US imperialistc

objectves. Regardless of what Pakistan did, there was an important

foreign policy shif, and it was carried out under coercion by US. Pakistan

made a swif transiton from supportng Taliban regime in Afghanistan to

facilitatng the US forces to dislodge the Taliban regime.

The war in Afghanistan commenced on 7 October 2001, as the

armed forces of the US, UK, Australia, and Afghan United Front comprising

³⁰ Galtung, “A Structural Theory of Imperialism.”

Vol. 2, No. 2, December 2019

American Imperialism in Post 9/11 Era: Perspectve from Pakistan

Taliban adversaries of Northern Alliance launched Operaton “Enduring

Freedom.” The primary driver of the invasion was 9/11, with the stated

goal of dismantling terrorists belonging to the Al-Qaeda and ending the

use of Afghanistan as its base of operatons. The US made a commitment

to free the world that it would remove the extremist Taliban regime from

power and create a viable people friendly democratc state. Afer the

overthrow of the Taliban regime in Kabul by NATO forces, Hamid Karzai

was placed as the head of the Afghan government. More than a decade

into the war, the NATO forces headed by the US contnue to batle a

widespread insurgency in Afghanistan. The war has now spilled over to

Pakistan and its tribal areas. The war in Afghanistan has proved to be

the longest war ever fought by the US. Though considerable reducton of

the US and NATO forces has taken place, a viable Afghan democratc state

is stll a far cry.

In the post 9/11 era, the US imperialism has taken an assertve

posture in Pakistani context. Various events of this period can be cited where

the US forced Pakistan to act in accordance with their interests despite

the fact that the acton entailed harmful ramificatons for Pakistan. These

incidences have not only undermined Pakistan’s positon as a sovereign

state but has also exposed decadent nature of the US diplomacy. One of

the contentous issues was drone atacks. Commencing in June 2004, tll

2007, there were only nine atacks. In 2008, 33 strikes were launched.

There was a major increase over previous years. Afer becoming President,

Barack Obama substantally increased rate of drone strikes and 53 drone

strikes were conducted in 2009. In 2010, there were 118 drone atacks

and in 2011, there were 70 drone atacks.31 Though these atacks aimed

at defeatng the Taliban and Al-Qaeda militants in Pakistan, but resulted

in killing of 2,851 persons including 176 children. Large scales of protests

were registered by politcal partes and the civil society over these drone

atacks, causing immense collateral damage. Similar protests and frenzy

was witnessed when in sheer violaton of the sovereignty of Pakistan, US

³¹ Peter Bergen and Katherine Tiedemann, “The Year of the Drone,” New America Foundaton 24

(2010), htp://kironmemo.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Waziristan.pdf.

Vol. 2, No. 2, December 2019

Stratagem

Navy SEAL carried out an acton known as “Operaton Geronimo” and

atacked the Abbotabad compound where Osama Bin Ladin was allegedly

hiding with his family. They killed him and took his body with them.32

Raymond Davis episode is another case in point. In January 2011,

Raymond Allen Davis, a former US soldier and contractor with the CIA,

killed two armed men in Lahore. Davis was jailed and charged by Pakistani

authorites with double murder and the illegal possession of firearms. Later,

the US officials began assertng that he was protected by immunity that he

enjoyed being a diplomat due to his employment with the US Consulate in

Lahore. A car that came to help Davis also killed a third Pakistani while

speeding on the wrong side of the road. The Pakistani government came

under immense pressure and on March 16, 2011, Davis was released afer

the families of the two men killed were paid $2.3 million (in a form of

monetary compensaton or blood money). The judges acquited him, and

Davis was immediately deported. An official no less than President Obama

himself intervened to get the employee back home.

In the light of Galtung’s theory of structural imperialism, certain

conclusions are drawn with regards to above referred events. Galtung

describes relatons between centre and periphery as dominant relatons.

Centre (Elites and policy makers) of the centre (US) has powerful nexus

with the centre (Elites and policy makers) of the periphery (Pakistan). This

division turns out to be an exploitatve mechanism, whereby, centre of the

centre commands obedience of centre of the periphery. But this obedience

is at the cost of periphery of the periphery. Raymond Davis commits a

criminal offence and periphery of the periphery demanded a due process

of law. Centre of the periphery in compliance to centre of centre let Davis

go with total disregard to local laws and procedures. Similarly, periphery

of the periphery protested drone atacks, causing collateral damage, but

centre of the periphery subtly consented to the centre of the centre to

³² S. Hussain Shaheed Soherwordi and Shahid Mi Khatak, “Operaton Geronimo: Assassinaton of

Osama Bin Laden and Its Implicatons on the US-Pakistan Relatons, War on Terror, Pakistan and Al-

Qaeda,” South Asian Studies 26, no. 2 (2011): 349.

Vol. 2, No. 2, December 2019

American Imperialism in Post 9/11 Era: Perspectve from Pakistan

carry out atacks as the atacks were serving the interest of the centre.

There are three key assumptons of Galtung’s theory of imperialism.

These have been discussed in the theoretcal construct of the paper.

These assumptons have significant relevance with regards to Pakistan-US

bilateral relatons. Firstly, there is harmony of interest between the centre

in the centre and the centre in the periphery naton and we see a measure

of cooperaton, empathy or understanding between the US ruling elite

and Pakistani ruling elite. This support is visible in some of the actons

the states initated in response to various events. Secondly, there is more

disharmony of interests within the periphery naton than with the centre

naton and we find that in case of Pakistan and the US. Thirdly, as opposed

to harmony of interests between centre of the centre and centre of the

periphery, there exists a disharmony of interest between the periphery in

the centre naton and periphery in the periphery naton. The US public has

different mind-set than that of the Pakistani public and their interests do

not coincide.

Drone strikes, Osama Bin Laden raid and Raymond Davis issue

are instances where there was not only a violaton of certain ethics and

morality but of internatonal law. These instances are excesses commited

by an imperial power to expand and maintain its influence. Again, there is

a difference in public opinion and public policy. The major problem in the

periphery naton is that public opinion and public policy are two different

spheres. Public opinion is the voice of periphery in periphery whereas

public policy is the domain of centre of the periphery. There exists a gap in

public opinion and public policy in periphery natons. For instance, public

opinion calls for an end to drone atacks, but public policy allows it silently.

Since the centre of the periphery is the driving force behind public policy

and it has an alignment with centre of the centre, it tends to disregard the

aspiratons and interests of the periphery of the periphery.

According to Galtung, there is structural imperialism or

dominaton relaton between the natons. Centre of periphery exists in

Vol. 2, No. 2, December 2019

Stratagem

compliance to the centre of the centre. There is structural resistance to

structural imperialism. It is due to this resistance mechanism that the

US, despite inital successes in Iraq and Afghanistan, faced resistance or

confrontaton by the insurgents. This resistance mechanism has led the US

to decide about quitng Afghanistan. In Pakistan’s context, though the US

apparently seems to have largely succeeded in commanding compliance

of the centre, but resistance mechanism has clearly led to incidences

of defiance. Resistance to operaton against Haqqani group in FATA as

Pakistan wanted to act in its own interests, delay in the release of Raymond

Davis, resistance to Kerry Lugar Bill and suspension of NATO supply route

were some occasions when imperial decree was not carried out, at least

not right away. The resistance is becoming meaningful as the periphery is

becoming aware, alert, responsive and sometmes even violent.

Conclusion

The American imperialism began to exist in the current form afer the

World War II, when European imperialism waned and retreated. The cold

war divided the world in two major blocks. One was led by the US for

the capitalist world and the other was led by the USSR for communist

world. Both the super powers had their sphere of influence and exercised

imperialistc control in their respectve domains. Afer the collapse of Soviet

Union, US became sole imperial power and contnues to make an impact

across the globe. While American imperialism faces existental challenges,

it maintains dominaton by being a superior military and economic power

of the world and is likely to contain or limit any power that aspires to atain

corresponding politcal, military or economic clout.

Imperialism is a system of dominaton that has existed for centuries

and will contnue to exist. It is likely that it will change its form as it did in

the past. Structure of internatonal politcs today favours imperialism as

dominaton can be referred to positvely as it gives a balancing impact.

Stronger states have the logic of power to command compliance of

Vol. 2, No. 2, December 2019

American Imperialism in Post 9/11 Era: Perspectve from Pakistan

weaker states. And weaker states or periphery natons are divided to serve

the interest of imperial power or the centre. Centre-periphery facets of

Galtung’s theory are relevant to Pakistan-US relatons. The relaton of the

powerful and weak will exist as stated. It will exist tll the tme centre’s

power wanes or diminishes, and periphery’s positon strengthens. As for

the US, it will contnue to dominate tll the tme its military might, and

economic superiority is substantally challenged by a state or an alliance

of states.

Vol. 2, No. 2, December 2019