Pak-US ties: new shift in the rollercoaster ride

Listen to article

The relations between Pak and the US have often been described as a turbulent and transactional partnership, marked by cycles of cooperation and discord. From Pakistan's early alignment with the US through alliances like SEATO and CENTO to counter Soviet influence, to later facing sanctions, the relationship has seen repeated shifts. The US sought Pakistan's support during the Afghan War, leading to a brief period of closeness, but camaraderie was disrupted again when sanctions were imposed after Pakistan's nuclear weapon development. Post-9/11, there was another revival as the US relied on Pakistan for its War on Terror.

Now, we are witnessing another shift as the US has, for the first time in history, imposed a ban on a state-owned organisation of Pakistan. But why has the US taken such an aggressive step against Pakistan? Let's review.

Jon Finer, a prominent figure in the Israeli lobby in the US, has been actively campaigning against Pakistan's ballistic missile programme. But what drives this effort?

According to the American security doctrine, the US prioritises the safety of its own interests and those of its principal allies. To this end, it employs measures such as sanctions or, if deemed necessary, military action to neutralise potential threats. US policy ensures that even the neighbouring states of its key allies do not grow strong enough to challenge the regional balance in favour of the US.

This approach is rooted in broader objectives of maintaining global dominance and reinforcing the US role as a key enforcer. The US often acts as a 'policeman of the region'.

Finer claims that Pakistan's ballistic missile programme primarily targets the US. But how could Pakistan target a superpower located 12,500 km away? Clearly, this statement lacks credibility.

In its official statement, the US accuses Pakistan of involvement in the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, which seems more like insecurity over Pakistan-China defence cooperation.

Pakistan is now completely independent of US military technology and has positioned itself among the top 10 ballistic missile programmes in the world. With the introduction of the full-spectrum deterrence doctrine, Pakistan has strengthened itself and its military technology.

According to Finer, the number of nuclear-armed states capable of sending missiles to the US is very small. While naming Russia, China and North Korea as examples, he speculates that Pakistan is also attempting to add itself to this list.

Potential reasons behind these accusations are related to:

1) Containing China in the South China Sea: The Pacific strategy of the US is a significant reason behind its pressure on Pakistan. One major challenge for the US in containing China in the South Asian region is the strong ties between China and Pakistan. The US has established an extensive military presence across the Indo-Pacific to counterbalance China. From large bases to 'lily pads', it has encircled China in the South China Sea with military installations. Notably, the largest overseas US military base, Camp Humphreys, is in South Korea, while over 120 US military bases are stationed in Japan.

Additionally, the QUAD alliance, comprising the US, India, Japan and Australia, extends influence across the Indian Ocean and beyond. China views this network as a significant security concern, highlighting the US efforts to check China's expanding military power and intensifying the strategic rivalry in the region.

2) US policy and allies' influence: Donald Trump's foreign policy emphasised power through strength. This approach asserts that peace can only be secured through readiness for power. Trump echoed this philosophy, stressing that America's mission is to achieve peace through strength.

Meanwhile, active members of the Israeli lobby campaigned against Pakistan. While US presidents may change, influential lobbies remain consistent in shaping policies. On the other hand, India is a key US ally against China in South Asia. Pakistan's strong ties with China pose a hurdle to US interests. These shared interests of the US, Israel and India contribute to the growing pressure on Pakistan.

3) Pakistan's urge to achieve second-strike capability: Pakistan's pursuit of second-strike capability could be another factor in the ongoing conflict. There is an arms race in South Asia, driven by India's rivalry with Pakistan and China. India has advanced its military technology to counter China, prompting Pakistan to upgrade its defence capabilities. Despite Pakistan's warnings about India's growing arsenal of weapons of mass destruction, the US has ignored the issue, revealing its double standards.

Pakistan adopted the full-spectrum deterrence doctrine and shifted its defence production from reliance on the US to cooperation with China. India's development of second-strike capability, including its Agni-III missile, has heightened Pakistan's security concerns. Reports suggest that Pakistan, with assistance from China, is developing similar capabilities in exchange for greater influence at Gwadar Port. In their broader interests, the US and allies don't want Pakistan to get this capability.

What can the US do?

The US has several strategies to pressure Pakistan, including: supporting opposition parties; imposing sanctions on institutions and individuals; leveraging IMF influence to weaken Pakistan economically; and using proxies or social media to create internal instability.

These tactics align with the US and its allies' broader goal of pressuring Pakistan to roll back its nuclear and missile programmes or adjust its military doctrine. Historical precedents exist for such actions. For example, when former Bangladesh PM Sheikh Hasina refused to allow a US base in the Bay of Bengal, subsequent political changes took place, indicating a possible US involvement.

Similarly, the US could exploit Pakistan's IMF dependency or support opposition figures, as seen in Richard Grenell's public backing of Imran Khan. However, Pakistan's firm stance, as expressed by its Foreign Ministry, emphasises its sovereignty and refusal to compromise on defence production.

To conclude, Pakistan's strength lies in unity and understanding the strategies of superpowers that act only in their interests. Political instability in the country may not always stem from internal issues but could be influenced by foreign powers pursuing their agendas.

The people of Pakistan must stay aware of these dynamics and remain focused on preserving national interests. Only through unity can Pakistan counter superpower threats and maintain a balance between global powers.