US-Pakistan ties — a thaw is not enough
Our friends need to keep their faith with us.
There are reports to the effect that both Pakistan and the US have recognised the need to lower the rhetoric and to initiate damage-limitation efforts.
If true, this would be a welcome change, as the two countries, and especially their defence and intelligence agencies, have been engaged in a spat that is neither elegant nor advantageous to either. While the Abbottabad operation hurt Pakistani pride and exposed its vulnerabilities, it also demonstrated continuing US disdain for an ally’s sensitivities, thus confirming the fragility of their ties and exposing the deep mistrust that inhibits a meaningful partnership.
Signals from Washington remain mixed, either as part of a well-thought-out approach or evidence of confusion that is endemic to American decision-making process — a fact so graphically portrayed in Bob Woodward’s Obama’s Wars. In his Afghan strategy speech on June 22, the president had the opportunity of soothing Pakistan’s ruffled feathers. Instead, he was harsh, warning that henceforth, the focus of US counterterrorism efforts would be Pakistan. More worryingly, he emphasised using “targeted force” against threats, without the need to “deploy large armies overseas”.
A week later, John Brennan, the US counterterrorism chief, unveiled America’s new strategy that threatened “a broad, sustained, integrated and relentless campaign that harnesses every element of American power”. As regards Pakistan, Brennan acknowledged that though the relationship has been critical to “many of our most significant successes against al Qaeda”, the US would not hesitate to undertake an operation similar to that against Osama if the need arises. Former ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad, who remains influential in neocon circles, has advocated that the US should begin to “accelerate security ties with India as part of a containment regime against Pakistan.”
Consequently, it would be naive to dismiss fears that the administration may want to vent its frustration for failures in Afghanistan by increasing the frequency of drone attacks and initiating clandestine special operations in Pakistan. At the same time, pressure will be ratcheted up on Pakistan to launch operations in North Waziristan as well as to go after the Haqqani network. Continuing American references to Pakistan’s nuclear weapons, as was done by Senator John Kerry in recent Senate hearings, should not be seen merely as rhetoric, but as evidence of current thinking in Washington.
In such a situation, reports of border clashes between the Pakistan and Afghan security forces and a public demonstration in Kabul condemning Pakistan assume significance, as they may well have been ‘orchestrated’. They therefore need to be addressed speedily and effectively as we cannot afford any ‘daylight’ in relations with Kabul at a time when both should be on the same page, especially on the issue of the peace process.
Unconfirmed reports indicate tentative feelers by both the US and Pakistan on counterterrorism cooperation under the rubric of the strategic dialogue, as well as the possible return of the military trainers who had left in the wake of the Abbottabad incident. American officials, however, claim that the thaw in relations with Pakistan has been less on account of concessions by them and more because of pressures on Pakistan, especially through such questionable tactics as withholding spare parts and delaying repairs and overhauling of helicopter fleets and weapons systems.
If true, such a thaw will be neither sustainable nor meaningful. There is a need for greater clarity and recognition by both that even when they disagree, their overall cooperation remains vital, both bilaterally and for regional peace and security. The outgoing Indian foreign secretary’s remark, that she sees a change in Pakistan’s attitude towards tackling terrorism, is a ‘concrete’ development that is most welcome. It should not, however, be used merely as a propaganda ploy or for cosmetic, transient advantages, but to usher in genuine, fundamental change in our approaches, both domestically and abroad. Our friends need to keep their faith with us.
Published in The Express Tribune, July 8th, 2011.
If true, this would be a welcome change, as the two countries, and especially their defence and intelligence agencies, have been engaged in a spat that is neither elegant nor advantageous to either. While the Abbottabad operation hurt Pakistani pride and exposed its vulnerabilities, it also demonstrated continuing US disdain for an ally’s sensitivities, thus confirming the fragility of their ties and exposing the deep mistrust that inhibits a meaningful partnership.
Signals from Washington remain mixed, either as part of a well-thought-out approach or evidence of confusion that is endemic to American decision-making process — a fact so graphically portrayed in Bob Woodward’s Obama’s Wars. In his Afghan strategy speech on June 22, the president had the opportunity of soothing Pakistan’s ruffled feathers. Instead, he was harsh, warning that henceforth, the focus of US counterterrorism efforts would be Pakistan. More worryingly, he emphasised using “targeted force” against threats, without the need to “deploy large armies overseas”.
A week later, John Brennan, the US counterterrorism chief, unveiled America’s new strategy that threatened “a broad, sustained, integrated and relentless campaign that harnesses every element of American power”. As regards Pakistan, Brennan acknowledged that though the relationship has been critical to “many of our most significant successes against al Qaeda”, the US would not hesitate to undertake an operation similar to that against Osama if the need arises. Former ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad, who remains influential in neocon circles, has advocated that the US should begin to “accelerate security ties with India as part of a containment regime against Pakistan.”
Consequently, it would be naive to dismiss fears that the administration may want to vent its frustration for failures in Afghanistan by increasing the frequency of drone attacks and initiating clandestine special operations in Pakistan. At the same time, pressure will be ratcheted up on Pakistan to launch operations in North Waziristan as well as to go after the Haqqani network. Continuing American references to Pakistan’s nuclear weapons, as was done by Senator John Kerry in recent Senate hearings, should not be seen merely as rhetoric, but as evidence of current thinking in Washington.
In such a situation, reports of border clashes between the Pakistan and Afghan security forces and a public demonstration in Kabul condemning Pakistan assume significance, as they may well have been ‘orchestrated’. They therefore need to be addressed speedily and effectively as we cannot afford any ‘daylight’ in relations with Kabul at a time when both should be on the same page, especially on the issue of the peace process.
Unconfirmed reports indicate tentative feelers by both the US and Pakistan on counterterrorism cooperation under the rubric of the strategic dialogue, as well as the possible return of the military trainers who had left in the wake of the Abbottabad incident. American officials, however, claim that the thaw in relations with Pakistan has been less on account of concessions by them and more because of pressures on Pakistan, especially through such questionable tactics as withholding spare parts and delaying repairs and overhauling of helicopter fleets and weapons systems.
If true, such a thaw will be neither sustainable nor meaningful. There is a need for greater clarity and recognition by both that even when they disagree, their overall cooperation remains vital, both bilaterally and for regional peace and security. The outgoing Indian foreign secretary’s remark, that she sees a change in Pakistan’s attitude towards tackling terrorism, is a ‘concrete’ development that is most welcome. It should not, however, be used merely as a propaganda ploy or for cosmetic, transient advantages, but to usher in genuine, fundamental change in our approaches, both domestically and abroad. Our friends need to keep their faith with us.
Published in The Express Tribune, July 8th, 2011.