There is, however, another angle from which the evolving situation can be viewed, perhaps with less trepidation. The starting point has to be that the drawdown of American forces does not mean the abandonment of Washington’s vital interests in the huge swath of land that includes Central Asia, Afghanistan and South Asia. Secondly, notwithstanding the current strains in the Pakistan-US relationship, Pakistan will, in the months and years ahead, remain a major concern of American policymakers. In the article mentioned above, I had said that Pakistan ran like a subtext in President Obama’s latest address. There has been ample reiteration of this fact for the simple reason that the new American strategy to safeguard its interests in the region at a much lower cost in blood and treasure would remain dependent upon Islamabad remaining a loyal and compliant ally. So the present delicate situation is more a consequence of Pakistan’s failure to reach an accord with the US on assisting Washington to pursue its political and economic agenda in this part of the world without sacrificing Pakistan’s core interests.
After a frustrating decade in Afghanistan, the US is virtually giving up on nation-building and returning to counterterrorism. The fundamental interests that will be pursued with undiminished zeal would be the survival of a regime, which may include elements from the Taliban that accept decisive American influence. A new factor for this power assertion is the need to control the mining of copper, iron, lithium and other minerals and the denial of the same to others, especially China. This is additional to the unique geopolitical location of the country, which would be defended by an effective American military force stationed in it under a treaty, and an Afghan army totally disproportionate to the country’s economic resources at present. Washington also will not forego the leverage that its military presence in Afghanistan gave it to shape the policies of the Central Asian states rich in fossil fuels and rare Earth elements. Then there is the question of keeping Iran surrounded by states that remain sensitive to American policy. Above all, there is the overriding question of fitting Pakistan into a new South Asian paradigm. The most substantive challenge to American dominance of the global economy has come from Asia. It is of utmost importance to the United States that India continues to remain within the orbit of its influence and that the India-Pakistan contention does not detract from it.
Washington would also not give up the pressure for the transformation of Pakistani state and society, though it has only a limited interest in its historical context or its present complexity. A more robust Pakistani government enjoying mass support would have succeeded in making the United States appreciate its own dilemma. A new report by the Centre for a New American Security describes Pakistan as a “differentiated” polity, requiring a differentiated American policy. WikiLeaks alone will explain why American analysts reach this disturbing conclusion. The present government in Pakistan has to restore national purpose and pride or make room for others who may be able to do it.
Published in The Express Tribune, July 11th, 2011.
COMMENTS (33)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
@Faisal: This maybe our point of view__but such a policy has been in practice for 60+ years and it has not succeeded. Why not try something new and constructive.
@Ali
"There are no Islamic terrorists.....there is Hindu terrorists...(India) and Christian terrorists (USA)....."
Which planet you live in brother? get a life.
@Tanvir Ahmad Khan:
I thought the comment made by Sebastian Foulkes was dripping with sarcasm....
mazen: I accept your comments with a rider. The part I accept is that there is no other alternative but to hold talks by India and Pakistan. The parts I disagree are 1. india does have border disputes with China and Bangladesh. That has not made India send terrorists and religious bigots into their country and cause mayhem 2. India did support Tamil terrorists due to local political games in India. The lesson we learnt, ie the brutal killing of Rajiv gandhi, will never be forgotten by Indians even though it is more than 20 years old. We did make amends though, ruthlessly chasing and eliminating the people who plotted the murder in no time, We did help Srilanka eliminate Tamil tigers. They do not exist now. Will Pakistan make amends like that. That is the point of my contention
I am most grateful to Sebastian Foulkes for his gracious comments. Noor Nabi and many others critiqued my article constructively and expanded the scope of the discussion to include dimensions that were difficult to address properly in a 700-word Op-Ed piece. This is what this newspaper aims at. Many thanks.// @ Irshad Khan : you always give vent to some personal animus perhaps under a fictitious name. The Express Tribune is not the forum for my autobiography or an account of my professional career.@ Babloo: Good luck in your own bubble; you are entitled to your judgement. @ Syed Nadir El-Edroos. There are limits to American power and nations like Cuba under Castro and Iran since their revolution have demonstrated these limitations. I will not mention China's epic journey. Please do not under-estimate the strength of a united people under a dynamic and enlightened leadership. Why this despair?
Excellent article by Ambassador Khan. Thorough, sharp and full of wisdom. Pakistani friends, you are lucky to have such an erudite person present your case to international readers of this paper
These kinds of deaths in Kashmir are due to security forces and by your mujaheddin.If; however, I admit your accusations pertaining to infiltration of mujaheddin in Kashmir, then how would you defend the fact like India's border dispute with China and Bangladesh, sovereignty related problems with Nepal, Tamil's issue with Sri-Lanka and others. O.K Pakistan is the root cause of the violence in Kashmir, but what about the above-mentioned issues. Even the layman knows about the hegemonic model India is pursuing in this region and also working as a privy of US to counter balance China's growing influence in south Asia. The fact of the matter is this that the politicians of your country has a same obdurate mindset which they had 60 years back and in my country too. Peace in Pakistan will affect the future of this region including India, so thats why This is in India's interest to hold peace talks with Pakistan. I am saying this is because India is in shape right now and have a leverage too to resolve all erst-while and thorny issues because of its growing influence just like China.
@ P N Eswaran
There are no Islamic terrorists..there is Hindu terrorists..(India) and Christian terrorists (USA) which have wreak havoc upon the world since 2nd world war...
Ramble
Faisal : It is upto you to have a good relationship with India or not. We in India couldnt care less. But the reason you have given ie India playing with Kashmiri blood is nothing but hyperbole. These kinds of deaths in Kashmir are due to security forces and by your mujahideens. The mujahideens did not differentiate at all. They killed muslims, hindu pandits, hurriyat leaders (for towing their line) and their own family members for cooperating with Indian security forces. I bet you cannot attribute that to India at all. And Pakistan has lost many more thousands of lives due to sectarian and religious bigotry than India. So please write some truth, Sound and light show is not going to get you anywhere,.
The Taliban are not pious Muslims who can do no wrong, they are mercenaries with a criminal bent of mind. Pakistan is a real sucker if it believes that it can gain strategic depth by supporting the Afghan Taliban. The US has realized that in spite of its aid keeping the country afloat the Establishment continued their negative propaganda. The last thing the Military wants is for the citizens to see the Americans as Aid givers and saviors. This will weaken their status vis a vis the democratically elected Politicians. They will not allow this. The US has built a dossier on all the terror activities of the ISI which gives it great leverage and has the Army squirming. All these protests about CIA activities in Pakistan is not because they are destabilizing the country but really because they were gathering information on the links between terrorists and the Military. The latest move of the US to negotiate with the Taliban is a tactical master piece. They will win over the Taliban with bribes and other goodies and then let them loose on Pakistan. Pakistan is so sold on its ideology that it will suddenly discover too late that its best friend(Taliban) has defected with lethal consequences. Pakistan can outwit the Americans with a two pronged approach. Make peace with India and launch an all out assault on the Taliban. This means that all forces will have to be moved from the Western sector to the Eastern sector. Peace with India is impossible without handing over the terrorists who attacked it or trying them all speedily and sending them to the gallows. That is the goodwill that will allow all forces to be transferred to the real battle field. Simultaneously scorching heat has to be applied on the Taliban and Al Qaeda fighters and supporters and clinically eliminating them. Will the policy makers be able to come up with such brilliant "lateral thinking" or are will they continue with the same faulty strategies as the country hurtles to doomsday. The Military-Mullah-Militant axis is a burden the country cannot carry any longer.
@Faisal
"international powers have intentions to disintegrate Pakistan due to its nukes"
Pakistan has done a fantastic job with its nukes - rogue-trading to other countries - that it leaves nothing to do for the international powers to disintegrate it. Lest you forget the "strong Army of Pakistan", too, did a superb job in the disintegration of the country (Dhaka - 1971).
Kashmir and water are indeed important matters to resolve with India. But this has to be done through peaceful dialogue and not through exporting terrorism to India as exemplified by the ISI involvement in the horrible attacks in Mumbai. And what makes you believe that the Pakistan army is strong? It is both overweight and incompetent; cannot fight a conventional war but can only think of ways to make money through sugar mills, shaadi-ghars, and exporting nuclear technology.
@Noor Nabi, Your comment on the op-ed piece is more to the point than the op-ed itself!! Great to see that i am not the only one who thinks on these(ur mentioned) lines.
I am not in favour of having good relationship with India unless the issue of Kashmir and Water is resolved. Indians are playing with the blood of our kashmiri muslim brothers and we are talking about good relationship. A strong Army of Pakistan is guarantee for peace in this region other wise international powers have intentions to disintegrate Pakistan due to its nukes.
Noor Nabi
This is just plain dishonest. The problems plaguing Pakistan right now are everything to with our toxic relationship with America and nothing at all to do with India.
The whole world and tom dick and harry's of Pakistan know and understand that the precarious state of pakistan is only and only because of its relations and attitude towards India ... sadly the Army / Politicians / and the Mulla brigade dosent thinks so.. it really shows that thou its outer shell is democratic like ... its run by pure minority ... ie by the Army / Fudals / Politicians / Mullas which will constitute hardly any percentage ... I really wonder what does the pakistani media do ?? by not exemplifying the root problem ...
Brilliant but one question sir why Pakistan always failed to adopt a result-oriented foreign policy, despite that knowing the intention and objectives of the rival powers, including US and India.
The US agenda is to de-nuke Pakistan, cut Pak army to size, contain the Islamic terrorists and empower civilian government. Only under these conditions that US can hold on to the region indefinitely. This incidently will be good for the Pakistani people.
@hassan: I am staying. Have to watch the ending of the show. Might as well watch tthe end. I hope there is one. If we are lucky the whole edifice of lies may crash and we begin anew. If not perhaps we become the new nation of Ayotollahs. This dysfunctionality is full of suspense as scripted and lethal as it is. But all the best in Australia. Make it your own. Good luck bro.
Why should US be involved in the transformation of Pak state and society? Why the hell should they care?
It's a fact, despite being the largest donor, US is hated and despised by the entire population of Pak.
US knows that it cannot win the hearts and minds of average Pakistani in the face of terrible indoctrination and hate campaign carried day in and day out against it in media and madrassas. For US, being involved in Pak, a lose-lose situation for them.
We have taken them for a ride all these years, and now those naive people are realizing this slowly. A rich man does not mind parting with money, but he hates the idea that he has been made a fool of. He will surely want to get his money back.
Don't expect US to anymore be a well-wisher of Pak. With our constant pinpricks, we have brought this situation upon ourselves, that US has started thinking Pak is their enemy number ONE. Let's brace ourselves for the catastrophic consequences that lie ahead. (I have already shifted my family out of Pakistan and will be going to Australia later. What about you guys?)
@Syed Nadir El-Edroos:
What about differentiated policy from USA side?
The same old stories and pieces of articles/speeches put together make this article. No new idea, no new line of action but just boasting as an expert on foreign affairs, particularly on Afghanistan. But why did you fail to show any achievement in your time of sitting at helm of affairs? The nation do not want to be misguided any further.
What a bogus pice that lacks any purpose or coherance.
its not often that i have read an analysis of the situation facing Pakistan that has been thoroughly thought out as much as this, i just hope that the powers who are currently running Pakistan take note of this, although i doubt they have the wherewithal to understand the consequences of this article. lets hope that there are people in power who have the interests of Pakistan to take note of this article. . but unfortunately i doubt it,.
All the analysts, critics, policy research papers conclude on the same proposal...this government must exploit the conditions in Pakistan,s best interests which, in fact can be done, though requires ability and proficiency, or make way for another government... The first part in itself is a paradoxical statement, this government for sure does not carry the ability or the vision to constitute and execute a policy....what we are left with is the hope that a new government might do it. I am not sure though, how will that happen and more importantly when..also what leaders are we expecting to solve the problem...so, for me, the more important questions are when do we get to see a new government and how could this be made sure it will work..i surely expect nothing of the familiar faces.....
You wrote: "an Afghan army totally disproportionate to the country’s economic resources at present."
Thanks you very much. I have been pointing this out for a long time the same thing but for a different country. The source and primary cause of all our economic miseries "a Pakistan army totally disproportionate to the country’s economic resources during its entire history." When a highly experienced and astute man of your stature can see this problem with the nascent govt of Afghanistan, why can’t you and the others see it for Pakistan? We can have as much false ego (I would not call it pride) as we want but the fact is all our defense equipment is from the US and we would always be dependent for the spare parts of F-16 and likes. Can a poor country with a nuclear deterrent maintain the luxury of more than half a million army? We have more highly paid generals and military officials than most countries of the world. However, in the economic sphere we are way behind with 40% population below poverty level compared to densely populated India at 37%. My point is that why don’t we look at ourselves and only then worry about the size of Afghan army, after all charity starts at home. Let us put our money where our mouth is.
"Differentiated Policy" ?! If anything Americans do have a knack of inventing interesting words!!
Differentiated Policy - I presume this means confusion and anarchy in Pakistan. Military wanting it's toys from the US, yet donot want to go after it's 'strategic assets' a.k.a. 'good' terrorists. Mullahs swaying a large section of the polulation and wanting to establish a Caliphate with Sharia. A proggressive liberal section, also pulling strings in certain areas wanting strong democracy. And finally, a poor section, wanting to get rid of everyone else!
There is, indeed, a dire need for Pakistan “to develop a coherent and viable policy” in view of the rapidly changing landscape in its neighbourhood. The initiative should be led by the non-military leadership of the country and the exercise should not be relegated to the control of the military establishment which, for the first time, is beginning to feel the heat to justify its existence as the biggest devourer of the country’s scarce resources.
Washington, like other global powers, is going to do all it can to protect, preserve and even advance its own geo-political interests in Central Asia, Afghanistan and South Asia. The relationship between the US and Pakistan is not just strained; it has collapsed. Right from the word “go” it has been a relationship between the Pentagon and the Pakistani military; CENTO and SEATO are perfect examples. An effort on the part of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto to open up with China was soon followed by the consequences of the 1965 war with India which, thanks to Altaf Gauhar, an average Pakistani believes was won by Pakistan. Subsequent humiliations in Dhaka (1971), Kargil (1999), Abbottabad (2011) and Mehran (2011) speak for themselves; each one of these stupidities can be traced back to the military leadership.
One must not forget that Pakistan’s nuclear programme was allowed to develop with a wink and a nod from the US in return for Zia-ul-Haq’s services against the Soviet invasion. However, as the world knows, Pakistan’s nuclear programme was poorly managed by its military establishment that began to enrich itself under the table by trading in nuclear secrets. The “unholy” General, Amir-ul-Momineen Zia-ul-Haq, also prostituted the interests of the country by creating an “unholy” alliance with Saudi Arabia.
Pakistan cannot afford to continue having a bad relationship with India; in the long run it is more important than the relationship with the US. The infamous ISI is also the major stumbling block in letting a thaw take place; this has to end. What is in the best interests of the people of Pakistan – peace in the region, investment in education, health and housing – does not coincide with the narrow interests of its overweight and incompetent military. This is where the problem lies.
Whoare those others who would initiate the much promised change?
Vulnerability is the destiny of smaller states particularly if they lack internal cohesion. Pakistan unfortunately falls in this category. The developments around Pakistan remind me of World System School (Andre Günter Frank, Wallerstein, Samir Amin et al). Theoretical assertions aside, it is also the geographic location of Pakistan and the religious zeal of its inhabitants. The country sits on the route invading armies from the north. .
What a pathetic attack on the government. "A more robust Pakistani government enjoying mass support would have succeeded in making the United States appreciate its own dilemma" No, US acts on its own and its citizens interest. Its not going to be swayed by a Pakistani government with mass support, especially when the military pulls all the strings in regards to Pak security policy. ISS doesnt fail in its reputation as an establishment mouthpiece.