Murphy’s law and Pakistan-US relations

Murphy’s famous law that everything that can go wrong will go wrong, seems to apply to Pak-US relations at this stage.

One of Murphy’s famous laws states that everything that can go wrong will go wrong. This seems to apply to Pakistan-US relations at this stage. The jinx in the relationship set in with the increased drone strikes in Pakistan’s north-western tribal areas this year; the ‘wild card’ Raymond Davis case in March, followed by the unilateral Geronimo Operation carried out by the US in May that killed Osama bin Laden — all of which represent blatant violations of Pakistan’s sovereignty. In September, came the outrageous Mike Mullen diatribe, followed by the memo scandal in October, which still continues to cast a shadow on our bilateral relations. The Nato aerial attack on November 26, that killed at least two dozen Pakistani soldiers on the ‘Volcano’ checkpost, may have been the proverbial last straw that broke the camel’s back. It seems to have brought Pakistan-US cooperation to a grinding halt.

The recent exchanges between the two sides have increasingly become a dialogue of the deaf, with each side talking at rather than to each other. Pakistan’s response has been clear and categorical: immediate suspension of all Nato supplies passing through Pakistani territory, closing of the Shamsi airbase, reportedly used for drone attacks, and boycott of the Bonn conference on Afghanistan. Pakistan also demanded an apology for the loss of life inflicted on Pakistani forces in Salala. The US and Nato/Isaf have ordered an enquiry into the incident and are likely to respond on the basis of the result of the enquiry.

Pakistan’s decision to suspend its ‘business-as-usual’ interaction with the United States is a laudable assertion of its independence and sovereignty and the nation has taken a united position in reaction to the crisis. The question, however, is: how will we deal with a rupture of our relationship with the US? If the enquiry fails to place the blame of the attack on Nato/Isaf forces, Pakistan would have to maintain its hard position with the US in keeping with its honour and dignity. That would hurt Pakistan badly, as it would affect both the civilian and the military assistance we receive from the US, which we can ill afford at this time of great economic difficulty. We must be mindful of the fact that it is not only direct American assistance that could stop but the US could also influence multilateral financial institutions, as well as other donor countries, to review and possibly suspend their dealings with Pakistan.

These dire implications necessitate a Plan B, in case the rupture with the US is not repaired soon. In our thinking, the governing presumption is that the US needs us badly for its successful extrication from Afghanistan. However, what if the US manages to exit from Afghanistan without Pakistan’s help and cooperation? In fact, having opted for a hardball game, we should be prepared for even rougher treatment than we have received so far. The US Congress can slap sanctions on Pakistan that can be debilitating and injurious. There is vague talk in Washington of declaring Pakistan a state sponsor of terrorism, which would place us in the category of Iran, North Korea and Cuba. On the other hand, if we buckle down after having staked out our principled position so firmly, we would be forced to accept even more unpalatable terms. For our own sake, we have to take Murphy’s Law seriously and prepare ourselves for the worse.

Published in The Express Tribune, December 14^th, 2011.