Pakistan-US ties: Leaders huddle, but fail to move forward

Divergent interests lead to a deadlock between civilian, military leadership.


Zia Khan/kamran Yousaf May 03, 2012

ISLAMABAD:


The impasse on resumption of ties with the United States lies on two fronts – between Islamabad and Washington, and between Islamabad and Rawalpindi.


The country’s top political and military leadership appears to be in a fix on how to move forward to repair troubled ties with the US after Washington’s reluctance to apologise over last year’s Salala attacks, and halting drone strikes.

The civilian and military leaders met for a third time, in two weeks, but crucial decisions, including reopening of land routes for Nato supplies and attending a Nato summit in Chicago later this month, were deferred.

“The situation is as it was two weeks ago … there isn’t any change on both sides,” said a participant of Wednesday’s meeting presided over by President Asif Ali Zardari and Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani.

Army chief General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, ISI’s Director General Lt Gen Zaheerul Islam, key federal ministers and Pakistan’s Ambassador to the US Sherry Rehman attended the meeting that lasted several hours.

Obama’s surprise trip

The huddle came within hours of another meeting of the troika – the president, the premier and the army chief – to discuss the ‘regional security situation’.

More importantly, the meeting took place a day after the US and Afghanistan signed a strategic partnership deal that would allow Americans to maintain military presence in the war-torn country beyond 2014, even after the completion of the combat mission.

President Barack Obama flew into Kabul in dead of Tuesday night, on an unscheduled trip, to meet his Afghan counterpart Hamid Karzai.

One official attempted to play down the development, insisting it was long due, and Islamabad was in the loop.

“It doesn’t come as surprise for us … we were briefed on it by both the US and Afghanistan,” claimed the official, who wished not to be named. He added that Washington had not only invited Islamabad to attend the Nato summit scheduled for May 20 - 21 in Chicago, but also offered to host a trilateral summit of US-Pak-Afghan leaders on the sidelines.

Divergent domestic interests

No decisions were made at Wednesday’s meeting, however, due to divergent approach taken by the stakeholders.

While the military leadership was pushing for an early decision, the civilian authorities were keen to first get out of the brewing crisis emanating from the prime minister’s conviction by the Supreme Court last week, an insider said.

Nonetheless, there was willingness on both sides to move beyond the Salala incident and break months of impasse, another official said.

“It is election year here and in the US … that is what is making things complex,” commented a diplomat.

Last week, a US delegation headed by Obama’s point-man for the region, Marc Grossman, flew back to Washington without any progress after both sides refused to step back from their maximalist positions.

Islamabad wanted Washington to apologise over the Salala attack and give firm guarantees that the drone campaign would be called off. After Wednesday’s meeting, it appears that Pakistan is not ready to soften its position on both issues, and the deadlock might persist for some more time.

(Read: Resetting Pakistan-US engagement)

Published in The Express Tribune, May 3rd, 2012.

COMMENTS (12)

G.A. | 9 years ago | Reply

The presence of Pakistan's enemies on the battle grounds is a things known to everyone but now here seems to be an other developed campaign against us by our enemies even over Pakistan's national news stories...It all looks evident from the number of foreign commentators here, all of their remarks shows their own state policies against Pakistan.

Zaleem Singh | 9 years ago | Reply

Pakistan is nothing in front of US

India has very good ties with the US and Pakistani General- Kayani should resign from the post ASAP.

VIEW MORE COMMENTS
Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ

E-Publications

Most Read