Stereotyping Pakistan
While use of strategic depth by Pakistan is blamed for its reluctance to wholeheartedly support the US-backed government of President Hamid Karzai, it is unfair to put the entire blame of failure in Afghanistan on Pakistani shoulders. In fact, the often quoted notion of using Islamic militants to obtain strategic depth within the region itself needs revision given that Pakistan has also suffered enormously at the hands of Islamic militants over the past decade. The deep state’s apparent ability to manipulate these militants to achieve foreign policy objectives must also have corroded.
Moreover, collateral damage of drone strikes and other incursions into Pakistani territory — including use of an immunisation campaign to confirm the location of Osama bin Laden and manipulating provision of international aid to achieve strategic objectives — have all caused immense harm to the US image in Pakistan which makes it very hard for our government to remain a key US/Nato ally. This problem of negative perceptions is hardly one-sided.
There is evidence of increasingly negative portrayals of Pakistan in the US as well, ranging from accusations of duplicity in contending with militancy to challenging the very feasibility of the country as a viable nation-state. The US-based Fund for Peace institution has continually been questioning Pakistan’s very ability to survive and ranks this sixth most populous nation in the world high on a list of potential failed states. The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace has also published a recent paper on “Pakistan’s Impending Defeat in Afghanistan” which claims that irrespective of how the coming security transition in Afghanistan pans out, Pakistan is on the inevitable path of further destabilisation if it decides to support the Taliban.
Such lop-sided analysis fails to consider the impact of US policy failures themselves, including its ability to formulate an inclusive governance model in Afghanistan, supplemented by regional cooperation, to deny the Taliban from making a comeback after the impending Nato withdrawal.
Rather than trying to fight fire with fire, the US should have had the sense to invest in international conflict transformation by fostering notions of reconciliation, understanding and coexistence. In our part of the world, the US could have helped resolve the Kashmir dispute to allay Pakistani fears and neutralise the underlying imperative for apparent duplicity or the suspected adherence to the strategic depth doctrine, instead of fanning Pakistani insecurities by its unilateral recognition of Indian nuclear capacity to establish a regional counterweight to China. The US antagonistic relations with Iran have further undermined regional cooperation not only in Afghanistan but also in the Middle East.
It is about time the US administration takes a hard look at how it has been behaving since 9/11 and the resulting strain its actions have put on promoting understanding and cooperation between the West and Muslim nations in general. The former president Jimmy Carter’s recent op-ed for The New York Times has also referred to the waning US moral authority due to the manner in which its counterterrorism efforts are being conducted.
Yet, much of the analysis emerging from prominent US think tanks continues to further demonise the countries with which cooperation is being sought — as is evident from the over-simplified and biased portrayals of Pakistan. This prevailing lack of self-reflexivity must be overcome to prevent indulging in unproductive blame games and to prevent the reinforcing of stereotypes, which only serve to deepen mistrust and suspicions despite revival of transactional ties in the short-run.
Published in The Express Tribune, July 17th, 2012.
COMMENTS (64)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
@IndianObssessed: India and pakistan were new nation,they were near bankcrupt,there were so many forces pulling in so many direction,they had no choice in many matter.But Jinnah was right,in his belief that the future of Muslims would not be too bright,in federal India.Lot of well meaning Indians sight the presence of 200 millions in India today and sight the sucess of Premji and the Khans in Bollywood,and pseudosecularism and so called farse democracy.Do not mistake me for some one who hates India,far from it,I understand the true problem facing todays India.I do not know how many understand Tamil "vachanam,I will say for the hindu /north Indian brothers-----/Andey key raj mey kanna raja' --where every one is total blind ,guy with one eye is Tom Cruse. Do not compare yourself to basket case country.Japan,Taiwan,South Korea roughly got Freedom around !947,(even China I will include),where are they compare to India?.There is nothing to be proud off,We are today a reasonable econmy due to USSR going bust,and 1991 India had no place to go but West.and all the Commies then stood naked and discredicted.We would be still following lisence,quota, socialism Raj!.India is lucky there.To day Pakistani have no one to blame,if we were one nation,they will have 1000 conscipracy theory and blame us like they do USa,but in our case there will be meham and blood bath.So Jinnah was rt and Nehru/Gandhi almost commited blunder.Let us be happy we have no one else to blame but ourself.Good day.
I wrote a very honest appraisal of policy of Pakistan ,with USA,which has boomeranged on your nation,I agree it was not pleasant and flattering to you.It was very true ,pertinent and brutally honest.If you do not have guts and pass it,you short sale your people and country.They can handle the truth.I shall make another attempt.Former dictator went to well,one too many time,with OBL fiasco,USA policy makers did not show displeasure in public,but did not like being taken for fool,the relationship has gone down hill since then.How you can deal with USA,I could articulate but not on open forum.Contact me you know how.Your nation will be better off for having done.Continue to knock head on a solid wall and expect (knots on head) different result is not very smart.
@kaalchakra: Nehru never propagated 2 nation theory. He only refused to accept Jinnah's proposal for religion-based electorates. Had Nehru accepted Jinnah's proposal, it would have initially prevented India from disintegrating but would have lead to disintegration a few years later. Nehru did the wisest thing possible and chose the worst possible option in the interest of security of the new nation. History has proved him and other leaders like Patel right !!
So your saying that joint nation of India could have been a powerbase seems correct theoretically but would not have been sustainable because of the mindset of Jinnah and many of his elite land-holding followers who were only thinking about themselves. Infact they would created problems by using their influence with other princely states from merging in India unless their land-holding feudal rights were guaranteed which Nehru would not have agreed.
@antanu g: "US God like to India"????? It is because of US efforts that India saw reduction in terrorism otherwise it would have kept on increasing. India can't help but see US in positive light. Most of India's trade is with US. Indians go to US for education. We share many values (if not all) with US. US and India find that they can work together easily even as they seriously disagreed on many international issues where India had to side with Iran or China.
@Joginder: Well said but then India's alignment with Soviet was accidental as well as a necessity. Economic liberalism would have been less important compared to security given imposed wars on a poorly prepared nation of 62, 65, 71. People tend to look at things superficially. India did try to foster relations both diplomatic and trade with UK, Germany and US in preference to Soviet Russia but it got rebuffed from all 3 in indirect ways- either discouraged from going industrial or being proposed very high cost of technology transfer or technology transfer devoid of training/design even in routine areas of basic industry. Soviet extended a hand like nobody else did. It not only trained Indian engineers but gave design and training with open mind and open heart. When these western nations saw Russia making inroads, they opened their roads and India (unlike Pakistan) welcomed all and took everybody's technology and design. Unlike Pakistan, even when India was considered a basket case, India's sound policies of a)non interference in other country's affairs b)tolerance & forgiveness c)non-aligned (that was a major reason, many powerful countries did not intervene in India) d)good 5 year plans designed to achieve self sufficiency in industry, agriculture and education e)focus on import substitution f)focus on curbing import that did not come with design g)creating an internal system where all were granted equality and every province's food, culture, religion, language, was given equal importance. All of these policies were totally unlike any of Pakistan. If India had aligned with western nations without first building a stronger base, its domestic industry would have been wiped out and proliferation of MNC's could have slowly led to another indirect subjugation of India. There is a right time for everything and India opened up to West at a correct time !!
@Arya: Madeleine Albright said, it is the Pakistan which is an international migraine, that only India can cure.
Superb statement.....liked the way you stated
including use of an immunisation campaign to confirm the location of Osama bin Laden and manipulating provision of international aid to achieve strategic objectives — have all caused immense harm to the US image in Pakistan which makes it very hard for our government to remain a key US/Nato ally
Pakistan was not an ally of US in OBL hunting? or Was it? Is Pakistan objecting to the method or the Target? And has the vaccination campaign hurt US image or the elimination of OBL?
In our part of the world, the US could have helped resolve the Kashmir dispute to allay Pakistani fears
Are you suggesting a joint US-JUD-LeT campaign or are you suggesting that US should have ensured vacation of POK by the occupiers, as per the UN resolutions?
instead of fanning Pakistani insecurities by its unilateral recognition of Indian nuclear capacity
Are you saying that US should have asked for permission from Pakistan first? Well, if it is any comfort, the US did not ask India before declaring Pakistan the 'Biggest non-NATO Ally'.
Mind clarifying the prefered meaning of the above statements- PLEASE.
@kaalchakra:
Do you get cheap thrill by promoting antanu g as an Indian?
@antanu g: "@gp65: Pakistan was receiving those dollars for the very purpose of unsettling India.Dont deny the fact due to your bias. Had US not encouraged, helped, abated Pakistan in its India policy, Pakistan would not have dared to fight three wars. "
Why should I deny this fact. Ofcourse it is true. When US policies were anti-India, India opposed it. Now when the policies are largely consistent with Indian national interest, India collaborates with US. There is no duplicity on India's part as distinct from Pakistan which takes billions of dollars of money on one hand, calls itself a major non-NATO ally and simultaneously brings out "assets" like DPC on the road to manufacture anti-Americanism.
@antanu g: "@gp65: Pakistan was receiving those dollars for the very purpose of unsettling India.Dont deny the fact due to your bias." I don't think you still see why Indians on this forum believe you are a Pakistani, not an Indian who you claim to be. You are as delusional as Pakistanis. Read your statement again and ask yourself: were Bhagdad Pact, CENTO and SEATO formed against India? Pakistan was a member of all three. No, they were not. So, how can you call what you say a "fact"? "Had US not encouraged, helped, abated Pakistan in its India policy, Pakistan would not have dared to fight three wars. " This is true! But, again ask yourself: was US really helping or encouraging Pakistan against India? Why would a superpower want to do that in relation to a piddling power like India when it had far more to worry about with the Communist Bloc. US cannot be held responsible for Pakistan's innate impulses of duplicity even then. Pakistan joined all those pacts promising its loyalty to anti-communist cause but, in truth, never ever intended that. It found an excellent opportunity to take advantage of naivette of US, which truly believed that it was co-opting an ally against Communism.
Ah well. Author has a lot of unsolicited advise to USA (not to his own country).
So, Let us imagine US took his advise and helped solve Kashmir problem - What then? What will change on the ground? Taliban will disappear from afghanistan? Pakistan will forget 'strategic depth' because India has vanished?
And imagining Kashmir solution is 'freedom' what stops the bloodbath similar to 1947 partition with majority of Hindus/Buddhists of the area being massacred/ethnic cleansed as happened in 1947? Can author throw some light on what happened to minorites in Pakistan, and why it'd be different in kashmir? Also, what is to stop Kashmir to go Afghanistan way? It will be a Land locked country with some turmoil, and islamic passions - Ideal recruiting ground for Al-Qaeda. Why would world want to 'solve' this problem?
Indians, please think. Who benefits from Pakistan-India conflict? Had India not joined anti-Islamic bandwagon and, instead, agreed to live as cooperative brothers as the Great Quaid had envisioned, would Pakistan-India not have posed a threat to the supremacy of Americans? What keeps American military-industrial complex ruling over the world afloat? - massive arms purchases by poverty-ridden Indians who never tire of buying Pakistan-specific weapons. Indians - do the right thing for once. Listen to your own good and highly knowledgeable people like antanu g and nandita.
Again, one can only be amazed at the honesty and clarity of Indians like antanu g and nandita who survive in a seemingly vast ocean of bigotry and false information. Why do Indians like America so much that they deny American role in creating Pak-India conflict out of thin air just as they ignore the roles of Nehru and Mountbatten in popularizing the Two-Nation Theory?
@gp65: Pakistan was receiving those dollars for the very purpose of unsettling India.Dont deny the fact due to your bias. Had US not encouraged, helped, abated Pakistan in its India policy, Pakistan would not have dared to fight three wars. And dont name China....till late 60s China was not in a position to arm Pakistan against its misadventure with India. But then for new generation in India, US has become GOD LIKE who can not do anything bad.
@antanu g: "@gp65: you should go back to history lessons from 70s to 90s. even indiraji on numerous occasions had blamed CIA and it’s support to Pakistan for troubles in india and it was a fact. things turned Indian way only after our economic progress and being a huge market."
You mean 70s and 80s I suppose because Indira Gandhi died in 1984. Her son Rajiv died in 1991. Anyway, I grant you that India complained about CIA support to Pakistan. However India was not receiving billions of dollars at the same time. Nor was India proudly designating itself as a major non-NATO ally. So you are comparing apples and oranges.
Some profound insights here into how the external world demonizes Pakistan by falsely accusing it of sheltering terrorists and spreading global fanaticism and extremism. Well done, Ali.
"US could have helped resolve the Kashmir dispute to allay Pakistani fears…” A virtual fear, which is basically a continuation of confrontational mentality of pre independence era Pakistan, taking many turns now becoming a reality in the form of multi faced Frankenstein. The US is somehow made responsible for Pakistan's flight of fancies When Pakistan ceded Aksai Chin, part of the same Kashmir to China, it never sought US nod, so why involve it now?
Dear sir they say "you reap what you saw". Raising the militants and then giving them the authenticity by coloring them in name of Islam was the root cause of all the problem and how the world perceives Pakistan. So before pointing fingers at any one a little introspection will go a long way in resolving some of the bitter issues that Pakistan faces today. You discuss about strategic depth in Afghanistan and freedom of Kashmir, but our lid blows out when someone talks of unrest in Balochistan, it suddenly becomes our internal matter. How about helping coalition forces with full support without playing games and win the trust of everyone. How about Haqqani network, aren't they still our strategic assets for Afghanistan??? Dear sir, you forgot to tell us, how will someone trust us when they find OBL in our own backyard, we can keep on saying that govt or ISI was not involved, but someone definitely from lower/mid echelons must be there who helped or still helping such people to settle in Pakistan. David Headley confessed that.It is the inability of our govt. and our security agencies to weed out these roughs is causing this downfall in our international prestige.
@antanu g: "@gp65: you should go back to history lessons from 70s to 90s. even indiraji on numerous occasions had blamed CIA and it’s support to Pakistan for troubles in india and it was a fact.... Well, your time came and passed with the demise of Soviet Union and of "Indraji". Even the soviets changed, but not you! The problem with sworn Marxists is that they are intellectually lazy and inflexible. They are committed bigots and indeed ought to be committed. It is time to give your anti-Americanism a rest! I know you won't agree with that because your sole crutch would be lost!
America allways help pakistan when his intrest got involved and in the case of kashmir they not never gonna help us the reason is our arm selling market and we are not white caucasian even though they knew this fact that south asia is flash point of nuc war with poverty they dying every day since hundreds of years but now they will vanished from the face of earth kashmir and palestine are two great milking cows for west .....
I have read many inane pieces in my lifetime, but this contributor takes the cake. my advice to the young man who dares to expose his ludicrous thoughts to public scrutiny is this: Grow Up and have a point. I don't know what kind of development this consultant does, but I am absolutely certain his PHD is determining whether the Sun rises in the East or the West. Good luck Mr.Ali.
Our Foreign Ministry Dead As Ever. We Need To Put In Commercial Dynamics In Our Foreign Ministry To Make A Prosperous Pakistan. We Have No Idea How To Negotiate With America On Commercial Basis Or Even With China. The Dynamics Need To Be Pointing Toward Business Ventures Benefiting Pakistan. The Way Forward Is Not American Armament Purchases. Get Real With Poor Reality On Pakistan Ground.
author, what an article! neither head nor tail "mantra of do more" can you tell us what have we done to satisfy ourself as a civilised nation let alone america.i am sure you do'nt have any answer.
@gp65: you should go back to history lessons from 70s to 90s. even indiraji on numerous occasions had blamed CIA and it's support to Pakistan for troubles in india and it was a fact. things turned Indian way only after our economic progress and being a huge market.
@Ali tanoli: I think you have drawn a wrong conclusion from the discussion. Let the readers read the whole comment section & draw their own conclusion. http://blogs.tribune.com.pk/story/12108/hinudana-rasm-or-a-radical-mindset/#comments
Interesting to compare the learned author's analysis with that of Americans: +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ "Rather, the insurmountable obstacle is the political dysfunction of Pakistan, a country divided between a feuding, corrupt and insular civilian political elite and a military establishment dependent on terrorist allies and obsessed with unacceptable and unattainable geopolitical ambitions." http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-pakistan-puzzle/2012/07/16/gJQA1xScpW_story.htm
"The writer is a development consultant and a PhD student at the University of Melbourne " ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ One wonders about the standards of Phd at the Melbourne University after reading this piece by its brilliant student. Also it lays bare the limits of education in maturing the mind!
Whenever Pakistan feels the necessity to change but can not change itself, which is quite often, it tries to convince the rest of the world (and India) to change. This article is a valiant attempt at the same proclivity.
“In our part of the world, the US could have helped resolve the Kashmir dispute to allay Pakistani fears..”
Pakistan is a fearless hyena, specially when it comes to Kashmir. No nation in the world, which cares for itself, will do what Pakistan does to itself for the sake of Kashmir. Every help that Pakistan got from the US ( author has sadly forgotten this) since independence is one way or the other is directed towards this one single goal. It even went to Afghanistan to secure Kashmir. It tested nuclear bomb that too without the US help to allay its fears. The US can not cure Pakistan's Kashmir disease, rather as Madeleine Albright said, it is the Pakistan which is am international migraine, that only India can cure.
@andleeb: To the Military and Mullah you have to add Militant and the nexus that brought the country to its knees is complete. The anti democratic role played by the Judiciary cannot be underplayed either. Whatever may be the past there is no need to be diffident. India has never been a threat to any neighbor and never will be. Even a country like Bhutan which does not have a rag tag Police force or Army does not see any threat. No Indian would ever accept the concept of non state actors or strategic depth, neither would subscribe to conspiracy theories to arouse base passions. Be positive and work sincerely to achieve the transformation required - every individual should be the catalyst for change.
pakistan to US.....help uss to resolve kashmir issue...otherwise we will shoot ourself... Great !!
@antanu g: @Amjad: As succinctly explained by @gp65, Indians often come to the table with certain stated positions when discussing Pakistan, and the reason is our tortuous history - on that count I agree with the title of the op-ed; no doubt, Pakistanis have even stronger in-built biases which are taught to them as children through their textbooks and from other sources (first sentence of my earlier comment). However, setting the bar so low also creates an opportunity to exceed expectations very easily by just behaving like a normal neighbor/ nation; when Pakistan chooses to give up even on these opportunities, it is unlikely to be very popular - and the results are before you.
@andleeb: Wow finally found someone who agrees with me Pakistan's enemy no 1 is not USA, India , Israel ,UK...but the Pakistan Army. Friendly relations with India no perks for the army a doomsday scenario for the fauj.
The author complains about how the world sees Pakistan. The world's view just might be correct. I was a kid during the Indira Gandhi rule and the few foreign journals (Life, Time, Reader's Digest, Times) which got through to us showed India as a basket case and a Soviet stooge. We, very patriotically, deeply resented this image. And yet, over the distance of time I can see that that indeed was the case. India was indeed living in self-imposed poverty and used the facade of Non-Alignment to promote the Soviet agenda. My point being that the view over the distance gives a more clearer perspective.
It might help for Pakistan to adjust to the world instead of the rest of the world adjusting to Pakistan.
Weak and unproductive societies feel entitled to things which they have not worked hard enough to deserve. That sense of entitlement comes through strongly in this article.
Whine, whine, whine. Appease us, appease us, appease us.
"which makes it very hard for our government to remain a key US/Nato ally." +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ then what is the imperative to remain a 'key US/Nato ally'?
"The deep state’s apparent ability to manipulate these militants to achieve foreign policy objectives must also have corroded." +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Hahahahahahahahahaahah
Internet India is is on rampage as usual. No surprise.
@BlackJack: Just goes to show why the author's comments are right on the money - otherwise it would not have precipitated such vocal responses from the Indians such as you and "S".
"In our part of the world, the US could have helped resolve the Kashmir dispute to allay Pakistani fears and neutralise the underlying imperative for apparent duplicity or the suspected adherence to the strategic depth doctrine, instead of fanning Pakistani insecurities "
What would you think of a kid if you heard a child say to his parent,
"Daddy, I am afraid Didi will hit me (although she never has so far),/ so please take away her candy and give it to me. If you don't do that I know you don't love me and would justify my kicking sand on my neighbour. Oh and I already ate up my ice-cream which you gave me when I promised you not to kick sand on the neighbour.
What ? You are holding me accountable for eating the ice-cream and still continuing to kick sand on the neighbour? I HATE you".
You would think the kid was spoilt, paranoid and delusional. Now reflect on your plea to the US and tell me how does that make you sound.
The author should join PTI the party of' 'I am dim'. IK will agree with everything you have said and added more gems..like darwin is/was west's stooge...as soon as the drone attack stops and nato leaves..talibans will turn into most pious and peaceful humans etc..
No one is needed to portray a negative image of Pakistan. Pakistan does it all by itself. I often read Pakistani papers and see the mayhem happening there. Unemployment, women getting killed, terrorists roaming free, corruption in high places (PM and President under court scrutiny for it) and bombings in major cities it is all there for anyone to read. Just reporting this in another country's newspapers should not be considered as a deliberate attempt to malign Pakistan.
@S: Making the Pakistani public tremble in fear of India is vital for our Military to keep sucking funds from us. If the Indian bogey disappears, the Army will have no reason left to rob the awam. Our real enemy is our military and our mullahs, not India (dare the newspaper publish that? Huh! guess not. No wonder we will fail)
It's all India and US's fault for the travails of Pakistan! It's all India and US's fault that terrorists roam free!! What a writeup!!
I could not make much sense of what was being said here Then I read "In our part of the world, the US could have helped resolve the Kashmir dispute to allay Pakistani fears .." I didn't read there after and saved some time.
@Ali tanoli: You do realize that the demand for a separate nation and also the 2 nation theory came from Muslim league not Indian national congress?
At this point ofcourse everyone in India and Pakistan (barring maybe some really small fringe) would not want to undo partition. But your notion that Hindus pushed for partition because they did not want to live with Muslims is bizarre and unsupported by facts.
@antanu g: "@BlackJack: your comment reeks of bias and hatred. you are fully aware about the duplicity of US in the past in connection to Indo Pak relations in the past but refuse to acknowledge."
Everyone has their own biases. Most Indian (with some exceptions) see certain issues e.g. Kashmir, terrorism, Siachen, 1971 differently from most Pakistanis based on national loyalties. But I read the comment multiple times and did not see any hatred in the language used. Also would you be kind enough to refer to US 'duplicity towards India?' Of-course US relations with India are independent from US relations with Pakistan and everything that US does for India it does not do for Pakistan and vice-versa as well. However duplicity would be if they said one thing and did another. Can you please quote examples of that?
Seems like a continuation of the authors last article which complained about Pakistan ranking high on the failed nation list which he viewed as another unwarranted attack by America. That article was pathetic and this one isn't much better.
Trust is hard to earn and easy to lose. This article gives me whiplash in the manner it contradicts its own premises over and over.
@BlackJack: your comment reeks of bias and hatred. you are fully aware about the duplicity of US in the past in connection to Indo Pak relations in the past but refuse to acknowledge.
Other day i was reading a comment by harihermani in the blogs section of Hindu Rasm by Ali Rehman and he photograph the true picture of india when he said that indian sub continent leader fails to understand the importence of united india where we would have a most powerfull india today i think it was good judgment and advice given to mr akash but what i think hindu leadership of 1947 had fear that muslims gonna occupy india the way they did before and they complettelly ignores the possibillity of nuclear pakistan they thought its gonna be dummy neighbour like shri lanka or nepal but now what gonna happend i think they have to solve the kashmir dispute or who knows..........................
“In our part of the world, the US could have helped resolve the Kashmir dispute to allay Pakistani fears..”
Author, did you read the following? "US President Barack Obama has ruled out any outside role in the Kashmir dispute but has emphasised the need for other nations to play a role in stabilising Pakistan.
“It is not the place of any nation, including the United States, to try to impose solutions from the outside,” said Mr Obama, apparently endorsing the Indian position that it would not accept any outside role in settling this issue."
http://dawn.com/2012/07/16/outside-role-in-kashmir-ruled-out-obama-welcomes-pak-india-efforts-to-lessen-tension/
author playing the victim card. totally biased article with myopic analysis of situation. It completely forgot to help pakistani govt responsible for bad image. Any bombing incident - bali, london, NYC all found their links to Pakistan soil. Why shouldn't world have negative image of Pakistan?
Isn't it time for Pak to come out clean and say to world see we don't sponsor terrorist anymore. You are victim of your own policies where you decided to harbor these terrorist on your soil for meaningless jihad.
Wow! 'Ulta chor kotwal ko daatein'? When will you folks come out the "They're out to get us" mentality! The negative publicity you are getting is because the rest of the world has deemed you fit to receive the negative publicity - not because there is a concerted conspiracy to malign you! Nobody is out to get you. From day 1 of the Afghan campaign, your govt. has played both sides, you still differentiate between good and bad Taliban, you are still not willing to accept responsibility for your actions and indulge in wild conspiracy theories blaming all and sundry (except yourselves), you try and cheat / extort the NATO force on providing them transit (the apology issue - Salala), the world's most wanted man is found right next to your military academy (that really deserved an apology from Pakistan to the rest of the world) - and not a peep from your govt. - the list is endless; after all that you have the temerity to ask why the world sees you in a negative light?
Might not agree with everything you have said, but do agree with the failed state paranoia running in US circles. That's because of cognitive biases that have developed in these circles over time because of sub-optimal research, misplaced over-confidence, and to some extent over-dramatization. Out of the many authors that have written on the issue (including our own), I have found Anatol Lieven to be the most credible, whose thesis runs counter to most of the authors on the subject.
Writer is totally out of touch with reality! Get real.
"In our part of the world, the US could have helped resolve the Kashmir dispute to allay Pakistani fears.." . Pakistani "fears" or Pakistani aggression? As it has been seen countless times, it's India not Pakistan which has been living under "fear" of external aggression. The reason the Kashmir issue is not resolved is because India has decided not to solve anything under threats of terrorism, period. The US or any other player has no role to play in it and they get that.
"In our part of the world, the US could have helped resolve the Kashmir dispute to allay Pakistani fears..." . Pakistani fears or Pakistani aggression? As has been proven countless times it is India, not Pakistan, which has been living under "fear" of external aggression. The reason Kashmir issue is not resolved is becuase India has decided not to solve anything under threats of terrorism, period. The US or any other player has no role to play in this.
— have all caused immense harm to the US image in Pakistan which makes it very hard for our government to remain a key US/Nato ally. My dear sir, the US is no longer concerned with its image in Pakistan, where the people have long been content to be manipulated by the powers that be and irresponsible media. There is evidence of increasingly negative portrayals of Pakistan in the US as well... This is really funny. You use every means possible to portray the US in a negative light in your country and are suddenly shocked when this happens to you in turn. Although the US has issued a mutually incriminating apology. There is no such thing as a mutually incriminating apology - and there was no apology, as you well know. In our part of the world, the US could have helped resolve the Kashmir dispute to allay Pakistani fears. So interference in Afghanistan is not ok, but interference in Kashmir is perfectly kosher? Yet, much of the analysis emerging from prominent US think tanks continues to further demonise the countries with which cooperation is being sought. Pray, which are these countries that you mention. As far as I know, there is only one nation that is being accused on duplicity.