Pakistan dreads abrupt US pullout

Military establishment, policymakers believe US was ‘bogged down', doesn't know how to take war to logical...


Kamran Yousaf December 04, 2010

ISLAMABAD: As the Obama administration prepares to review the Afghanistan-Pakistan policy later this month, Pakistan fears the US may abruptly pullout of Afghanistan, leaving the region ‘high and dry’ like it did over two decades ago.

The military establishment and policymakers at the Foreign Office believe the US was ‘bogged down’ in Afghanistan and doesn’t know how to take the nine-year-old battle to its logical conclusion. The assessment was shared with Washington ahead of the review talks.

“We understand the US has made a long-term commitment, but the situation on the ground may force the Obama administration to repeat the mistakes of the past,” remarked a senior foreign ministry official.

The Americans have often been accused of abandoning the region in haste in the mid-80s following the withdrawal of the forces of the former Soviet Union in Afghanistan.

The current US administration acknowledges the mistake and has promised a long-term stay in the region. However, despite the commitment, Pakistan is still sceptical.

The scepticism stems from the fact that Pakistan and the US do not share common views on some major issues.

The recently leaked US diplomatic cables also confirm that cooperation between the two countries in the war on terror is often marred by mistrust.

“We are not being kept in the loop by the US on the situation in Afghanistan,” disclosed a military official. But this is not Pakistan’s only worry.

In the recent US mid-term elections, foreign policy issues, including Afghanistan, were completely out of the map.

Although White House insists that the battle against extremism is vital, Americans are raising questions about fighting a war whose end is not foreseeable.

Interaction with US Congressmen and think-tanks during a recent visit by The Express Tribune to Washington revealed that the American public is more concerned about  its economy than the foreign policy. And there is a reason.

“You may be shocked to know that the US is facing a record deficit of over $1,500 billion and people are asking why we are spending billions of dollars in countries like Afghanistan and Pakistan,” a US congressman told The Express Tribune on condition of anonymity.

The situation may compel President Barak Obama to withdraw from Afghanistan ahead of the scheduled pull-out in 2014 he announced at the recently held Nato summit in Lisbon, he cautioned. “This is our biggest nightmare,” remarked a military official.

“If that happens, it will leave a devastating impact on the entire region… and we have conveyed this to the Americans,” he added.

Foreign Office spokesperson Abdul Basit confirmed that Pakistan had handed over proposals to the White House hoping to be included in the forthcoming policy review by President Obama. However, he declined from sharing further details.

Published in The Express Tribune, December 4th, 2010.

COMMENTS (9)

Anoop | 13 years ago | Reply @G.Khan, I never said Pakistan started the 2 Afghan wars. Pakistan broke an important rule in World Affairs. You dont support Armed Militants in your immediate neighborhood and ESPECIALLY, not in your own country. Soviet Union did attack Afghanistan, but why did Pakistan had to get into it? Look at India's case in both the scenarios. It supported LTTE and they turned back on us and killed Rajiv Gandhi, India's former PM. Lesson learnt. None of India's neighbours are stable but India never tried to get its hand dirty and relied on economic and diplomatic pressures to get its way. So, Pakistan could have ignored the 1st war but would have risked losing US's aid which was crucial and wanted to please it. The second war, Pakistan was waned of devastating consequences by the US. US had threatened to "bomb Pakistan into stone age" as Musharaff puts it in his book. "Pakistan still is in Strategic Position and World Powers have been fighting this wars to gain Strategic upper hand over one another. Arena is Afghanistan." --> You yourself state that Pakistan is suffering blowback, primarily due to its position next to Afghanistan and still you maintain its a strategic position. 3000 people died in 2009 alone in Pakistan. Pakistan's situation is not strategic, its tragic. 30 years of war next door!!! My God. India must be thanking heaven for not placing it next to Afghanistan. Nehru willingly chose not to take control over PoK probably for this reason. If it was not it was a damn good decision. Only if Pakistan had shown some spine the war could not have happened. Bottom line is if Taliban come to power tomorrow in Afghanistan, Pakistan will be blamed and economic sanctions put even. If Afghanistan,by some miracle, comes out of war and becomes a Democracy in the true sense of the word, Pakistan will lose its Strategic Depth and will naturally come close to India and other donors. If the result is something in-between the war in Afghanistan will continue to simmer and Pakistan will continue to suffer the blowback and continue to act as buffer against India. While India is almost unharmed of anything that has happened in Afghanistan in the past 30 years, baring minor irritants, Pakistan has been devastated by it. India is growing at almost 10% and Pakistan is growing at 1/3rd of that. So, go figure.
G.Khan | 13 years ago | Reply @ Anoop Why not to I brag about that? Have you ever seen two State of the Art Armies ( the biggest and most modern by any standards) invading a nation one after another, and you are telling me nothing to brag about? Have you ever fought such a long war ? We are still into one and had been for almost 30 years.?None of them started by us. We are still absorbing those war shocks serving as Buffer. That is the reality. Facts do not need your or anyone's else approval to be true. They are obvious and anyone can see them. Your argument have fundamental flaw. You Assume as if Pakistan is responsible for all these wars. Let me remind you that We did not invite Soviet army to invade Afghanistan. But , yes we had to deal with their invasion in the form of million refugees. We had no choice at all. We had to deal with devastated Afghans coming to Pakistan. We had to protect our own territory because we were the next in line. Where as your intelligence agencies were sitting on the other side and trying to create Law & order situation in Pakistan among that chaos. And You are lecturing me on Peace? Go read published Memoirs and released papers of your own agencies and you will know. The same thing those agencies are doing now when Afghanistan invaded by Americans . Did we invite USA to invade Afghanistan? Are we the decision maker? We are still getting refugees though. Therefore investigate first before you deny well known facts. Bottom line is we do not have any control over who invades Afghanistan but unfortunately we have to deal with the aftermaths. Instead of lecturing us on Peace , go and condemn the invaders and the REAL TERRORISTS first. Do you have courage? I haven't heard that loud and clear. I think your logic is as screwed up as your argument is. You show me how Pakistan could avoid these two invasions? Remain on the Facts. Pakistan still is in Strategic Position and World Powers have been fighting this wars to gain Strategic upper hand over one another. Arena is Afghanistan. There are these multiple pipelines that every Big Power seems to come to Afghanistan to fight for. Your Govt. Also did $1 Billion investment ( so called) in Afghanistan. We very well know its a pretext for presence to have some degree of control over those pipelines but US Army's Defeat will write the last chapter. As far as the trade is concerned, The region has a lots of potential between Pakistan and Iran, Afghanistan and route goes as far as Europe (Greece) via Iran and Turkey by Rail, China and all Central Asian States once the war ends and US starts withdrawing its troops. Unfortunately we are paying the price for the Follies of Superpowers who come to the Graveyard ( of Empires) one after an other to get buried.
VIEW MORE COMMENTS
Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ