Pakistan Foreign Office has stated that “Pakistan is convinced that a peaceful, stable, prosperous and united Afghanistan is in the interest of Afghanistan, Pakistan and the region.” How far this translates into actual policy by way of the talks held in Brussels is up for debate, particularly as Pakistan accuses Afghanistan of harbouring militants. Afghanistan, on the other hand, continues to assert that Pakistan aids militants who have a clear intent of keeping Afghanistan unstable.
These regional tensions necessitate the need for a trilateral solution, which may present an opportunity to quell suspicions on all sides. Washington has been pushing for such discussions since 2009 in order to address Pakistan’s fear of Afghanistan falling into Indian hands. Plans of Indian training of the Afghan Army and Indian intelligence agencies’ close liaison with Afghan counterparts could foster greater suspicion in Pakistan. The symbolic strategic partnership accord signed between India and Afghanistan has alarmed Pakistan’s military establishment. The core issue in the Afghanistan quagmire in the lead up to the Nato pullout is whether Indian and Pakistani leadership show statesmanship and start engagement on Afghanistan. Otherwise, the trilateral Pak-Afghan-US cooperation would be meaningless. The US must play its due role in facilitating wider regional cooperation and Pakistan must think of a broad-based regional solution to the Afghan quandary.
Published in The Express Tribune, April 26th, 2013.
COMMENTS (9)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
The picture clearly shows Kerry raising his hands in the air in complete frustration +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ And the distance between Karzai and Kayani speaks of their 'convergence'. Conclusion: Nothing positive is expected of this!
@imran bhatt: Karzai is an American stooge not a popularly elected leader.
Pakistani establishment must quickly realize that other countries can do to it what it does to others. And given Pakistan's economic situation, it is in no position to take such blows. It must wake up to reality rather than indulge in these games that only befit a superpower.
@Gohram Rind
The military doesn't report to the Civilian govt - no candidate has made a campaign issue of actually taking control of the military - the military controls foreign policy. As such the USA is just being practical - if that makes Pakistan look bad then I suggest you blame the military.
It would be more productive to have sent Zardari as the President, although in care-taker mode. Sending Army Chief sends abosultely wrong message.
@imran bhatt: True. This picture conveys what is wrong in Pakistan. How come an army guy came out of barracks and talk foreign policy instead of civilian bureaucrat/elected person. Who trains Afghan army is not Pakistan's business it is upto the Afghan civilian government.
US is sending very very wrong signals about future of democracy in Pakistan. Inviting Kayani in the absence of an elected government, US is again trying to undermine democratic institutions. Why US couldnt wait for the next elected government to host this meeting? Why this indecent haste was necessary especially when no progress was made?
The lesson from this is that US is afraid of popularly elected democratic government.
By the way who is this genius who picks the photo for the news. US asking Karzai come on and have a heart to listen what Kiani is proposing. While Karzai looks not in good mood. Kiani trying to keep his left over hairs dressed but with mysterious under lip smiles. What a game is going on in the region. Nation knows nothing but waiting only for elections.
This picture tells us all. When it comes to Foreign Policy, Army calls all shots in Pakistan. While two other countries represented by their elected politicians and a serving general to represent Pakistan.