Experts believe the fundamental calculus of the United States will remain unchanged whatever the outcome of Saturday's election - that it needs Islamabad's cooperation to fight militants in Pakistan and Afghanistan.
The United States has been careful not to take sides in the election, knowing that its blessing could be the kiss of death in a country where a recent poll put US popularity at a mere 11 percent.
Instead, the United States has confined its public remarks to praise of the election itself. Despite violence, the vote marks the first democratic transition in Pakistan's nearly 66-year history.
State Department spokesman Patrick Ventrell called the election "a historic development of which the people of Pakistan can be very proud" and said:
"We look forward to engaging with the next democratically elected government."
Nawaz the 'pragmatist'
Pakistan Muslim League - Nawaz (PML-N) chief Nawaz Sharif, seen as the front-runner, has criticised the US-friendly policies of President Asif Ali Zardari.
Nawaz has demanded an end to unpopular US drone strikes inside Pakistan and called for negotiations with the Taliban.
But the United States knows Nawaz well from his two stints as prime minister in the 1990s and most US experts see him as a pragmatist rather than ideologue.
Nawaz has campaigned not about the United States but the troubled economy - an issue on which it makes little sense to alienate Washington, which would be critical to securing another IMF package and has provided $20 billion to Pakistan since the countries entered a troubled partnership in 2001.
Seth Jones, an expert at the Rand Corp and former US military adviser, noted that tensions have eased considerably since the crisis following the US raid that killed Osama bin Laden in 2011.
"There is an opportunity for engaging a new civilian leadership that will ideally have at least a short honeymoon period," Jones said.
"I think there is an opportunity to reset the US relationship with Pakistan on some key issues - the security threats in Pakistan, some key economic issues," he said.
President Barack Obama's administration put an early priority on strengthening democratic rule in Pakistan, although it quickly learned that the long-dominant military remained a vital power-centre.
Secretary of State John Kerry has met army chief General Ashfaq Kayani three times since taking office, although the administration recently named a special envoy, James Dobbins, to step up interaction with Pakistan and Afghanistan.
Coalition imminent
A third key player in the election, Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) chairman Imran Khan, has been more outspoken than Nawaz or Zardari in criticism of the United States. But whoever wins will likely need to put together a coalition - which could prove unwieldy and, in Nawaz's case, include figures anathema to Washington.
A congressional aide who follows Pakistan warned that Nawaz could enter a coalition with hardline parties viewed as supportive of the deadly wave of violence against the country's Shias and other religious minorities.
While US officials have focused on the historic milestone of the democratic election, "it's going to be important for the administration to focus on what happens next in Pakistan, and which leaders we are going to have to work with to advance our interests in Pakistan," the congressional aide said.
"It doesn't seem as if the administration has thought that far along yet," he told AFP on condition of anonymity.
Analysts said that no matter who wins, vital US interests will remain in the world's sixth most populous nation with its nuclear arsenal, youth bulge and extremism problems.
The next government may try to renegotiate an agreement on supply routes into Afghanistan, a critical priority as the United States plans to pull out combat troops next year.
Daniel Markey, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, called a US exit from Pakistan "simply impossible."
"That does not mean we have to continue on with the degree of involvement that we have," he said, "but we will remain engaged with the challenge that is posed by this country, Pakistan, forever."
COMMENTS (22)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
Yes definitely there is the risk for US and US' interests because the US' opponent parties (PML-N and PTI) are getting majority seats in 2013's general elections which are pro Taliban's peace talks and negotiations instead of military operations against Taliban and against US' war and military's operations within Pakistan on the commandments of USA.Now US definitely shall have to cerebrate about and revise relations with Pakistan on bilateral levels most probably by stopping brutal,cruel and barbaric drones' strikes on Pakistani tribal areas because these drones' strike may/shall effect very very very badly and severely Pakistan-US relations in the future and good US' relations with newly elected Pakistani government are absolutely in favor of US if US wants to stay in Afghanistan peacefully till the end of 2014 before withdrawal.....
Botth the rightwing leaders run to the US to collect money. NS ran to the US on its Independence Day for support to get out of Kargil fiasco. IK always runs to the US to collect money. They would all need the US money and they are not the choosers. As far as the independence of any of these leaders is concerned they cannot go against their mentors and TTP extremists who have been backing them openly. Last but not the least the defense, foreign and security policies are made by GHQ not the elected politicians. The most these leaders can do is try to legislate. However, neither PTI nor MPL-N have much representation in the senate and cannot pass any law..
To what level of intolerance our society is sinking to...pathetic and all in just 30 years. Express Tribune your readers are proud of you. Pakistan just doesn't belong to haters. It equally belongs to those who cherish freedom of speech. Keep up the good work ET
I was going through stats the other day and I found same GDP & per capita income growth rate in NS era as it was in Benezir era
so they killed an endangered white tiger and they are going around with a stuff one....they are doomed!
@Kamran: Please note ET is run in collaboration with the New York Times
It means simply PMLN is all the threat to everyone including US, Bcz PMLN can head Pakistan towards an independent Foreign Policy and Stable Economy which is really the need of todays Global politics and change.
Cast your Vote to PTI, Stay Safe and Wait for the address from the PM of Pakistan IMRAN KHAN! inshALLAH hum dekhaingay Naya Pakistan!
The military controls foreign policy - the military doesn't report to the Civilian govt - and the military has made it clear it's not going to confront the terrorist who use Pakistan as a sanctuary to attack Afghanistan. It's exactly why the USA exist strategy from Afghanistan has ignored Pakistan - exactly why the USA doesn't really care who gets elected in Pakistan - and exactly why the premise of this article is incorrect.
@ Irfan Looking back at the style of leadership of NS in his two tenures in power, your assessment about his policies in future seems i correct.
@sami s That book seems to be written by someone who adheres to the neoliberal worldview and beleives that "liberating" the economy from government oversight equals progress. You cant simply turn to the rich and say "do as thou will". Thats the opening the door to the kind of crony capitalism that has wrecked Japan socially and economically.
they killed their white endangered tiger now they are driving around with a stuffed one...this is hilarious...
@FactCheck: In case you forgot, the government was ousted in a military coup after 2 years. And then Pakistan suffered 10 years of horrible military policy making which the Vice President of the World Bank deemed 'The Casino Economy'. This was followed by 5 years of PPP's incompetence.
I'm supporting PTI, but I'm also a student of the economy and I would be lying if I said that Sharif's industrial policies weren't impressive.
Is the paltry amount of USAid worth the attendent problems ? Look at Pakistan since 2010. What we have lost in exports, development, OPPORTUNITY COST & national cohesion is far greater than we have received from the US. Now Baluchistan and then KP may secede. Civil war rages across Pakistan. And all because leaders were too short-sighted to see the full costs of "the relationship".
Mr. Shareef will remain a runner only.. Mr. Khan will be victorious.. (Y)
@sami s:
Cl;early, the world knows how well Pakistan is plugged into the global economy and in awe with progress Pakistan is making. Surely destined for Super Power status by the end of the decade.
Sarcasm aside, what is the point of your post?
I am amazed that you claim to be Pakistani news paper, but you are worring about US interests. This is utter sham! People will soon realize that ET is a black sheep .
Nawaz is the best choice for US. He will act like Rehman Malik on the Dron issues, condemn in Public. The international funding for Sectarian violation will continue.
While researching on Nawaz Sharif's economic policies during 90s a friend came across this book written by Christopher Candland, "Labor, Democratization and Development in India and Pakistan". The author is a professor of political science in Wellesley College, MA.
Find below the excerpt of the first page of Chapter 3 that begins with the comment on the policies introduced in Pakistan in comparison with India during that time
"Pakistan's industrialist Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif followed his natural instincts and began liberating his economy almost a year ahead of us despite stiff opposition from his coalition... The Pakistanis, who have always been in awe of India's industrial prowess and envious of our democracy, can today be proud of having stolen a march on us. For once, we have something to learn from them...Unlike India, where reform is taking the slow, ponderous pace of an elephant, Pakistanis arezipping towards liberalisation... Clearly Pakistan is plugging itself into the global economy faster than India"....
ET please let us vote now, No risk... Donot speak for those who didnt do nothing in past 60+ years in pakistan.. its time for PTI.
There is no risk for US, as Pakistan is not going to fall in the hands of Talibans or the terrorists.