Pakistan’s narrow foreign policy
Pop quiz: what are the names of Pakistan’s ambassadors to Chile, Malaysia, Venezuela, Brazil, or Russia?
Pop quiz: what are the names of Pakistan’s ambassadors to Chile, Malaysia, Venezuela, Brazil, or Russia? It is very likely that most people will not know this and there is a reason — these countries don’t get adequate visibility in Pakistan. Hussain Haqqani (US), Wajid Shamsul Hassan (UK) and Shahid Malik (India) are the few ambassadors whom the Pakistani media finds relevant, relegating all others to secondary positions.
At the UN in New York, a venue that provides an effective medium to socialise ideas of national interest, Pakistan has no traction in South-South diplomacy. The reason is rather simple; our foreign policy is so focused on the US and India and Pakistani diplomats at the UN seem to have no clear directives from Islamabad. Unlike our engagements with the US, diplomacy with fellow developing countries is premised on the principle of voluntary partnerships, free from imposed conditions typical of a neo-colonial interaction.
Would it benefit Pakistan to build a relationship of trust with, say, Venezuela? Caracas can play a strategic role in improving Pakistan’s position among developing nations and provide Pakistani entrepreneurs with another destination to export. Google “Pakistan ambassador to Venezuela” and one will be disappointed with the result. The cynics among us will proclaim: we can’t afford to build stronger ties without Venezuela without ruffling feathers in Washington but Chile is a trusted American ally. And we have established a mission in Chile — a state that shares several similarities with Pakistan. Chile is often described as an American proxy state, was under military rule for a major part of its postcolonial existence and a country where a powerful intelligence agency had become the state within a state. Sound familiar?
The Pakistani ambassador to Chile, Burhanul Islam, seems to be gaining some ground with local political and business elite. But these gains were overshadowed when a Pakistani man with alleged terrorist ties was briefly held in Santiago. Only time will tell why Saifur Rehman was arrested but we know the evidence against him is so flimsy that the local judge finds it impossible to hold him behind bars. It is easy to digress in conspiracy theories: Pakistan had started to make progress with the Chilean elite and Americans felt it had to be contained. Or the American version of conspiracy theories, which is that Pakistan has established a chancery in Santiago to facilitate terror activities and export fanaticism to America via South America. Neither of these assumptions can be verified. And, let’s leave it at that.
In Brazil, an emerging power that should be our top priority, we have an embassy but no ambassador. The financial and cultural hubs of Sao Paulo and Rio De Janeiro are represented by honorary personnel. Google ‘Brazil’ and it’s a country worth investing a diplomatic relationship with. However, those who formulate our foreign policy in Islamabad don’t think so. Or take Colombia for example – another important nation that we can easily call our friend – and we are represented by an honorary investment counsellor in its capital of Bogota.
Going back to the initial question, we do have embassies in Malaysia and Russia but chances are most Pakistanis will not have heard of their names either. And that is because these missions receive no visibility in the Pakistani media — and old proverb “out of sight out of mind” is apropos. I believe that this decade has been a truly transformational one in the South-South relationship. Interactions between developing nations have yielded rich dividends in terms of cooperation in many areas, underscoring the vitality and relevance of strategic partnership. But, I am afraid Pakistan is missing the boat. Islamabad appears to be so focused on maintaining friendship with Washington and keeping an eye on Delhi that it has no time for rest of the world.
Published in The Express Tribune, June 25th, 2010.
At the UN in New York, a venue that provides an effective medium to socialise ideas of national interest, Pakistan has no traction in South-South diplomacy. The reason is rather simple; our foreign policy is so focused on the US and India and Pakistani diplomats at the UN seem to have no clear directives from Islamabad. Unlike our engagements with the US, diplomacy with fellow developing countries is premised on the principle of voluntary partnerships, free from imposed conditions typical of a neo-colonial interaction.
Would it benefit Pakistan to build a relationship of trust with, say, Venezuela? Caracas can play a strategic role in improving Pakistan’s position among developing nations and provide Pakistani entrepreneurs with another destination to export. Google “Pakistan ambassador to Venezuela” and one will be disappointed with the result. The cynics among us will proclaim: we can’t afford to build stronger ties without Venezuela without ruffling feathers in Washington but Chile is a trusted American ally. And we have established a mission in Chile — a state that shares several similarities with Pakistan. Chile is often described as an American proxy state, was under military rule for a major part of its postcolonial existence and a country where a powerful intelligence agency had become the state within a state. Sound familiar?
The Pakistani ambassador to Chile, Burhanul Islam, seems to be gaining some ground with local political and business elite. But these gains were overshadowed when a Pakistani man with alleged terrorist ties was briefly held in Santiago. Only time will tell why Saifur Rehman was arrested but we know the evidence against him is so flimsy that the local judge finds it impossible to hold him behind bars. It is easy to digress in conspiracy theories: Pakistan had started to make progress with the Chilean elite and Americans felt it had to be contained. Or the American version of conspiracy theories, which is that Pakistan has established a chancery in Santiago to facilitate terror activities and export fanaticism to America via South America. Neither of these assumptions can be verified. And, let’s leave it at that.
In Brazil, an emerging power that should be our top priority, we have an embassy but no ambassador. The financial and cultural hubs of Sao Paulo and Rio De Janeiro are represented by honorary personnel. Google ‘Brazil’ and it’s a country worth investing a diplomatic relationship with. However, those who formulate our foreign policy in Islamabad don’t think so. Or take Colombia for example – another important nation that we can easily call our friend – and we are represented by an honorary investment counsellor in its capital of Bogota.
Going back to the initial question, we do have embassies in Malaysia and Russia but chances are most Pakistanis will not have heard of their names either. And that is because these missions receive no visibility in the Pakistani media — and old proverb “out of sight out of mind” is apropos. I believe that this decade has been a truly transformational one in the South-South relationship. Interactions between developing nations have yielded rich dividends in terms of cooperation in many areas, underscoring the vitality and relevance of strategic partnership. But, I am afraid Pakistan is missing the boat. Islamabad appears to be so focused on maintaining friendship with Washington and keeping an eye on Delhi that it has no time for rest of the world.
Published in The Express Tribune, June 25th, 2010.