Even with the strange circumstances surrounding earlier spats between Pakistan and the US, the one that both sides claim to have overcome earlier this month was truly bizarre.
If, however, their differences have been resolved and relations brought back on track, it is a welcomed development. But unless this ‘patch-up’ is fundamentally different from earlier band-aid efforts, it is only a matter of time before it hits another road block. The ‘understanding’ has too many loose ends with both sides choosing to be less than honest in their statements.
It would be recalled that fearing national outrage from the Salala attack, the government — reportedly, at the military’s behest — passed the buck to parliament to formulate what our policy ought to be. Parliament, however, went overboard and came up with a wish list rather than a list of attainable goals. Nevertheless, the government chose to bask in the glory of ‘national dignity and honour’ with Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar, in her youthful exuberance, becoming its enthusiastic standard bearer. In the process, relations went into a free fall with US officials belligerent and ours worried.
It now appears that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s utterance of the word ‘sorry’ applied balm on our bruised egos and achieved the impossible. But if this word possessed such potency, surely it could have been uttered much earlier and saved us all the despair and agony of months. Suddenly, all the talk of “supremacy” of parliament and “no bargain on national honour” got flushed down the drain. Of course, if that was evidence of hard-headed realism, it would be reason to celebrate. But that would be expecting too much from a leadership interested only in transient considerations.
Even more inexplicable is the fact that when ‘realism’ finally dawned on us, we went overboard on the other extreme. We not only agreed to equate “sorry” with apology but also agreed to accept culpability for the Salala killings, as is evident from Secretary Clinton’s words: “Foreign Minister Khar and I acknowledged the mistakes that resulted in the loss of Pakistani military lives”. This was after a detailed report by the Pakistan Army denying any Pakistani responsibility for the tragic event!
The ‘understanding’ on drones, too, is worrying. Parliament’s demand was for a complete cessation of all drone attacks. Instead, we agreed on a vague concept of ‘intelligence sharing’ arrangement, which may provide the US with a legal fig leaf to continue its drone operations. On the issue of transit fee, after haggling for rates described by US Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta as ‘gouging’, we became unnecessarily generous, which reminded me of a similar episode when one of our redoubtable finance ministers turned down US economic assistance at lower rates, insisting on paying market interest rates, so as not to compromise our non-aligned credentials!
There is no denying that the continuation of this stand-off — while inconvenient and expensive to the US — was most detrimental to Pakistan’s interests. It was increasingly apparent that the mounting pressure from the US and its allies was becoming unbearable. But if our initial reaction to Salala was hasty and emotional, the decision taken after eight months of deep deliberations appears equally ill-considered.
The Afghan endgame is still to reveal its many twists and turns, particularly with both Washington and Islamabad unable to formulate their Afghan policy with clarity and consistency — elements that are desperately needed if peace is to be ensured in Afghanistan post-2014. It is not only Islamabad where political leadership is absent on Afghanistan; in Washington, too, the Pentagon and the intelligence apparatus have been pushing their own agendas, sowing confusion about US long-term objectives.
While Pakistan-US relations may not be “neurotic, mutually destructive”, as David Ignatius wrote in The Washington Post last week, their continuing differences are not only impacting their bilateral ties but also prospects of peace in Afghanistan. In such a scenario, it is Pakistan that is likely to suffer much more.
Published in The Express Tribune, July 18th, 2012.
COMMENTS (12)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
@Sid Taji: You are right, we Indians are obsessed with Pakistan, one main reason is that there is no nation on earth like Pakistan. It wants a lot of things but either does not do anything to get those or does it in ll wrong ways. For Indians, another reason for obsession is that you are next door and we have been overstretched in having to keep-a-more-than-extra watchful eye on our borders. You talk friendship or at least friendly talks in the same breadth as you talk of bleeding India by thousand cuts. Your people go to other countries to do all kinds of things but you act innocent. So Sid ji, is there one good reason, you think, we Indians should not be obsessed by our good neighbor?
@gp65: Pakistan is on child ("reference: childish tantrums") that is little slow in learning lessons. Since it acts without thinking, it gets into trouble more frequently. That does not mean US and India should stop loving it !!
@Lala Gee: @ Sid Taji "So please be cool, no harm in that." "What cannot be cured, must be endured". Good thinking!
@Sid Taji:
"On a side note, with so many Indians bad mouthing Pakistan, don’t you guys have your own newspaper to read, and comment on some stories there; seems very petty that you guys are all obsessed with Pakistan."
It is good that ET has provided our Indian friends to express their views openly for the benefit of the general public of Pakistan. At least now we know how they think about us. As you may have already noticed that they all blame Pakistan for falsifying history text books, but their comments clearly tells us who actually did what. So please be cool, no harm in that.
A very well written article. I agree with most of the analysis. The collective failure of the policy makers and the intelligentsia is the real tragedy of Pakistan due to the low level of intelligence and skills available in the policy making organs of the state. The reasons are simple, the unaccountable corrupt system. The corrupts in order to save their own skin try hard that nobody honest and more intelligent remains in the echelons of power and decision making circles, hence perpetuating the downward spiral of incompetence. This is exactly what is happening as you mentioned in your article. Unless corruption is controlled, and the corrupt removed and punished severely, there is no hope for the betterment.
It was clear as crystal that Pakistan would back the Taliban horse in the Afghan end game, making the global efforts for peace there much tougher. Backing Taliban, sheltering OBL, arming Haqqani network are all part of the Jihadi strategies which is the hallmark of the Establishment. Pakistan has to change course if it wants to be a peaceful member of the comity of nations. Giving lofty speeches like "we want to see peace in Afghanistan", while simultaneously scuttling global efforts there, carries little weight given the record of duplicity. One does not need to be a genius to know that ACTIONS speak louder than WORDS.
The delay in restoring the NATO supply demonstrates failure of the political leadership of Pakistan. This current band of rulers are busy amassing wealth, they are not familiar with international diplomacy. This delay has costed Pakistan on economic as well as diplomatic front. Reading the comments from so many Indians here, one can gauge how Pakistan has provided an opportunity to become a laughing stock. On a side note, with so many Indians bad mouthing Pakistan, don't you guys have your own newspaper to read, and comment on some stories there; seems very petty that you guys are all obsessed with Pakistan. I thought India was trying to become a global power and looking beyond Pakistan!!
@gp65:
I would prefer your last sentence be replaced by, "Time for blackmailing by Pakistan is up"
Basically it is quite simple. US did not budge and inch and Pakistan caved in after taking a tough stance initially. Let's review issue by issue:
1.There was no delay in the 'sorry'. Regret for loss of life was expressed as early as 3rd December 2011. It is just that at that time Pakistan thought they could use the anger on this incident to bargain for more. In the end it was the same regret that was expressed (Sorry for the deaths is regret not an apology). 2. US inquiry indicated that mistakes were made on both sides. Pakistan rejected that inquiry report initially. The final statement issued by Clinton bore out US position and the fact that Pakistan had accepted it. 3. On drones, US has not budged. Their stance is Pakistan will not take out the people who attack NATO/ISAF forces, then US will use drones to do so. 4. On compensation per truck, Pakistan asked that it be changed from 250 dollars per truck to 5000 dollars. US did not budge and the final agreement shows 250 dollars as agreement. 5. On CSF, Pakistan wanted US to pay the full $3 billion that it had billed US for. From first day US said that it only agreed that US$ 1.2 billion was legitimate expenses and it would pay for those. The final agreement was the same as US's initial offer.
Lesson: Blackmailing US does not work.
@Cautious: "...you were too busy having a childlike tantrum " You probably meant "childish tantrum". "Childlike" defines a child's action that is pleasing. Tantrums, even from children, are not pleasing at all!
It's not all that complicated. The USA position on the Salala incident hasn't changed one iota and after all the chest thumping anti American ranting you finally came around to agree that mistakes were made on both sides. Same goes with drone attacks - the American's haven't budged an inch on their position -- they have every right to take take action to defend their troops. As far as the Washington and Islamabad working together to formulate a strategy for Afghanistan -- that ship has sailed and you were left at the docks. The strategy (good or bad) was set without your input because you were too busy having a childlike tantrum -- that's life.
"...the word ‘sorry’ applied balm on our bruised egos and achieved the impossible. But if this word possessed such potency, surely it could have been uttered much earlier and saved us all the despair and agony of months."
Pakistan wanted a public apology from the President of the USA. US said no way. So Pakistan tried to play the other superpower cards like China and Russia. They were not interested. So the climbdown to Sec of State apology.
At least this incident proved to the Pakistanis they have to sustain the USA marriage: like it or not. Reality is, Pakistan does not have any other suitors due to its own policies. This reality will be forgotten when the next crisis hits.