Rivalries among major powers is not a new phenomenon as history reminds us. But in a nuclear age and technologically advanced world with economies intertwined, it has acquired a new dimension. It offers opportunities as well as unforeseen consequences and dangers, especially for middle-ranking countries that are dependent on both China and the US for their economic viability. And politics and strategy directly or implicitly being influenced by the extent of their orientation. Pakistan is one such country and perhaps the most illustrative example of it and would be instructive to explore its dilemmas, gains and losses. At the outset, I may mention, even it be obvious that historical circumstances coupled with our collective weaknesses, geo-political conditions and economic dependence have compelled us to lean heavily on foreign support. The challenge, however, to reduce dependence in the present adverse circumstances — when the infighting among political parties and strained relations between major institutions sees no end — would be a herculean one. But this in itself should be one of the major factors in shaking the conscience of our leadership across the political parties and state institutions to take measures for corrective action as a national goal so that stability and progress of the state could be achieved. The plight of the people and the general state of their despair cannot be ignored anymore. But the question arises: what will trigger this change of mindset and political conduct with animosity among political parties and amidst state institutions running so high?
On the contrary, a subtle and deeper understanding of current scenario offers Pakistan strategic position itself to take advantage in a positive sense from the geo-political conflicts. That should not be as in the past by heavily leaning on one side and aligning external policies more to suit the benefactor rather than prioritising national interests along with it.
Interestingly, while the US is having very close economic and commercial ties with China, it is also deeply concerned over its rising strategic and political clout. President Biden, like his predecessor Donald Trump, has taken several steps to reduce imports from China by promoting indigenous industry. But still there are certain critical components used in defence and strategic industries for which both countries presently rely on each other and will continue to do so until they produce their own. President Biden has also been insisting on its European partners to follow the same policy of reducing dependence on China and Russia. And as official statistics indicate imports of Russian oil and gas were down nearly 100% in the beginning of two months this year falling to 4.2 million euros from 2.2 billion euros. Similarly, there was a steep fall in import of coal from Russia. Both European Union and US official policy has been essentially to apply export controls on sensitive technology that could be used for military purposes and not cutting of or reducing trade, as it is equally to their advantage. US Treasury Secretary Janet Vellen had earlier stated that the “US did not seek to decouple from China, an outcome that would be disastrous and destabilizing for the world.” Later the Hiroshima summit in May fully supported the approach to China by further clarifying it that it is based on de-risking, not decoupling.
The policies adopted by the US and the West regarding China are very clear. Where cooperation benefits them, they will continue to pursue but will ensure that any business transaction that directly or indirectly contributes to strengthening China’s military capabilities would be denied. However, history reminds us when restrictions on exports of hi-tech items to China have been imposed, it has developed its own capability. Over the years, China has developed a fairly sophisticated R&D infrastructure by sending its students to top foreign universities abroad, mostly to the US and Europe and prioritising R&D in universities in country. Initially, and even now it does reverse engineering where technology is difficult to acquire.
As the China-US relations pass through a difficult phase, Beijing’s main focus of developing close relations, apart from Central Asian states, has been on the Middle-Eastern states, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, UAE and Yemen that have been traditionally very close to the US. Saudi Arabia finds China a convenient power centre to balance its strong leanings on the US. This move has been understandably to the chagrin of the US. The more recent rapport and restoration of diplomatic relations between Saudi Arabia and Iran is another strategic move by both countries to improve their strategic and diplomatic leverage. Sagacious leaders like former German Chancellor Angela Merkel have warned that America and China were damaging the interests of other countries by engaging in their trade war. Recent experience has shown that when former President Trump left the free trade agreement and Trans Pacific Partnership, the other 11 members continued their cooperation under the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement. The object of giving these examples is to highlight how countries continue to pursue their interests even against odds. Remarkable is the success of Singapore, a small island state which, through a highly efficient and people responsive government, raised the status and profile of the country. I have been giving example in my previous articles of how countries have achieved high economic growth under adverse geo-strategic environment through astute policies and diplomacy.
Our political leaders must focus on how best can Pakistan benefit from its good relations with the two major powers. In the present world it is possible, but demands a lot of finesse and balancing that comes with mature leadership anchored to the interests of the country and the well-being of its people. Having elections on time are important but more essential is for the incoming government to tap the potential of the Pakistani society.
If Pakistan’s destiny has to change for the good of its suffering millions, then its leaders cannot continue with their inexorable petty squabbles that are sapping the energy of the nation, besides doing great disservice to the people to whom they owe their present positions.
Published in The Express Tribune, May 31st, 2023.
Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.
COMMENTS
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ