Evaluating the US visit — distilling facts from hype

The PM’s visit to the United States and our relations with it could be viewed and assessed through several lenses and outcomes. Foremost, it has to be evaluated in terms of the extent to which it helped in repairing the soiled image and distrust between the two countries, and in what way it has contributed in self-correction of the country’s policies in order for them to have a beneficial impact.

Considerable preparatory work was done by both sides before the invitation was extended — which in itself was one of the major contributions. As sad as it may seem, governments are seldom known for self-correction unless pushed by major powers or international organisations. It is only when realisation dawns that there is no way out that they act.

The PTI government may have been more reform-minded than the previous ones, yet there were many areas, especially related to security and finance, that had to be addressed for any meaningful meeting to take place with the leaders of the United States and international organisations.

The most significant corrections that could have a long lasting impact was action against militant organisations, especially Lashkar-e-Tayaba, and the arrest of its leadership. Other significant steps were fiscal and monetary measures, including the tightening of state control on the movement of money, in order to conform to the Financial Action Task Force’s (FATF) requirements. In fact, a serious reorientation of Pakistan’s security and economic policies has been undertaken. It was not merely to satisfy the United States and the IMF, but in genuine national interest. After many years, decision makers in Pakistan find convergence in several policies that the IMF and Washington advocate, as genuinely being in the national interest.

The friendly tone and remarks of President Trump during the press briefing with Prime Minister Imran Khan strengthened the latter’s position abroad as well as domestically. The follow-up talk and the Q&A session at the US Institute of Peace raised his profile as a civilian leader. Domestically, it could possibly contribute to correcting the civil-military imbalance. Any improvement in the image of civilian leaders, whether in government or opposition, does contribute towards a democratic progress.

One of the major outcomes of the PM’s presence in the United States was that it consolidated bonds with the American-Pakistani community, enhanced their prospects of contributing to the country’s economic development and taking greater interest in its affairs. Undoubtedly, he does enjoy enormous goodwill amongst the Pakistani community. They have been his loyal supporters in philanthropic endeavours and it would be to Pakistan’s advantage if they invest and take greater interest in the country.

The PM’s highly critical projection of the opposition leadership while addressing the American-Pakistani gathering and during his address at the Institute for Peace was neither good politics nor a fair projection of Pakistan’s image. His crusade against corruption should have been projected to incentivise investment and for other good reasons without maligning the entire political leadership of the opposition. It was a reflection of the personal prejudices that seem to be ingrained deeply in the PM and he would be well advised to overcome them in the larger interest of the national pursuits that he is engaged in. Serious internal differences sap the energy of the nation and can be exploited by foreign powers to their advantage.

The PM’s statement that Pakistan’s media is free was contrary to the reality. In this modern age, it is not possible to project scenarios that are not based on facts. Politeness may prevent foreign interlocutors to remain silent, but the truth is not hidden from them. Increasing curbs in Pakistan on the media in recent times is a sad reflection of the lack of confidence that the government is betraying against dissenting voices — the very essence of democracy. What needs to be understood is that it would severely hurt the PTI government if it continues on this path of squeezing the media through new legislative and administrative measures. If only PM Imran Khan reflect back, he would realise that he owes his success largely to the support of the media that he received during the dharnas and afterwards. Moreover, clamping the press and freedom of expression portrays insecurity and lack of confidence.

The new relationship with Washington has other positive and a few negative elements. First, the US would like to reduce China’s influence in Pakistan. It will increase surveillance and intelligence activities and the condition of placing large number of observers in Pakistan to oversee the resumption of military assistance is an indication of this policy. In all probability, the US would encourage improvement in relations with India to lessen the impact of the deep strategic convergence between China and Pakistan.

An improved relationship with the United States would change Pakistan’s dynamics with the Western world and global organisations. This is already being reflected in the positive attitude of the IMF, World Bank and Asian Development Bank. Overall prospects of trade and investment in Pakistan could improve if the relationship with Washington stabilises. European countries, Japan and South Korea would be encouraged to do business and invest as they generally take the lead from America.

Potential of business investment from American companies especially from American-Pakistani entrepreneurs is likely to get better as the confidence level between them improves.

The most well-received aspect in Pakistan was President Trump’s mention during the joint press briefing that he was asked by PM Modi if he would be willing to play a role of a mediator or a facilitator between India and Pakistan on the Kashmir dispute. For PM Imran Khan and Pakistanis in general, it was music to their ears. Unsurprisingly, the Indian Minister for External Affairs refuted this statement whereas PM Modi thought best to maintain an intriguing silence over the episode.

Ultimately, Pakistan’s relations with the United States and other countries would depend on the political maturity of its leadership, its economic strength to attract global markets and the ability to strategically exploit its unique location to maximise benefits for its people and the region.

Published in The Express Tribune, July 31^st, 2019.

Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.