The bitter home truth about our foreign policy is that none of the major political parties can deny the opening narrative of the PML-N’s manifesto for the 2013 general election: “Pakistan today is at war within, while isolated abroad. Its independence and sovereignty stand compromised, its economic weaknesses are forcing us to go with a begging bowl in hand, while foreign states undertake unilateral strikes on its territory and non-state actors use it as a sanctuary to pursue their own agendas, oblivious to Pakistan’s national interests”. We have been muddling along on a ‘passage to nowhere’ because of the self-serving agendas of both our civil and military rulers alike.
Pakistan’s geographical location is a strategic asset rather than a liability; the ‘Strategic Vision’ must rebalance the geostrategic and geo-economic priorities. This can only flow from a coherent ‘National Security Strategy’; we have none! Briefing the Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs on June 25, the prime minister’s adviser on foreign policy, Mr Sartaj Aziz, said “the top priority would be accorded to the country’s own security rather than the agendas and priorities of other countries… and that a policy of non-interference in the affairs of other countries can make this possible.” Given the willingness of our rulers to sell the country down the river for their own survival, are these crucial caveats possible?
Since our political parties are not on the same page about some of our foreign policy considerations, a ‘Common Minimum Agenda’ must be drafted. We must decrease our dependence on others, the core objective being economic revival and sustained development, political differences notwithstanding. We must eschew our populist rhetoric to reduce the gap between the expectations of our people and the reality. Without energy, we cannot have manufacturing; without manufacturing, economic development is not possible. Pursuing expansion of investment and trade (and not aid), resolving the energy crisis must be a priority. Eliminating extremism will mean peace within and on our borders.
Pakistan is not only a geopolitical bridge from the North to the South, but also a geo-economic corridor connecting the East with the West. From Gwadar to Kashgar in China, Central Asia and West Asia, the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) underlines our strong relations with China. The CPEC is a ‘game-changer’ for expanding regional trade and investment, energy infrastructure and economic integration. The Ukraine crisis and the Western sanctions gives us a geopolitical opportunity as Russia (with China’s support) attempts to integrate Eurasia into the world economy. Closer ties with the Asean countries, Africa and Latin America will open new avenues for economic cooperation.
Whoever crafted the enduring delusion that Afghanistan gives us ‘strategic depth’ was a no-brainer; presently, it only gives us strategic headaches. Intensified dialogue with Kabul could help minimise the use of territory against each other and reduce the trust deficit. Constructive engagement could also ensure effective border management and revenue generation from transit trade, the return of three million Afghan refugees and facilitate counter-narcotics operations.
While increased trade and economic linkages with India is necessary, peace is not possible without resolving outstanding disputes, including Kashmir and the water issue. Unless a genuine and credible process addresses mutual concerns, meaningful change in the relationship will remain elusive.
We must also transform our relationship with the US by challenging the narrative; we are simply not getting our message across. The US is a key partner not only in trade and investment, but for enhanced defence and security considerations, particularly in countering terrorism. Our nuclear status must be given the same recognition as India’s. To fill the impending vacuum in the region, the US must treat us as a partner rather than a supplicant.
The Muslim world is central to Pakistan’s foreign policy, with excellent relations with Saudi Arabia at the very core. Continuing engagement with ECO, Saarc, OIC and Asean countries is important in both the global and regional context, traditional ties with the UAE, Malaysia, Qatar and Bahrain must be expanded. Can we gloss over our special relationship with Bangladesh and benefit each other by introducing a no-visa no-tariffs regime?
Looking after the Pakistani community abroad, our foreign missions must mobilise their potential to advance our national interests. Our diplomats must pursue balanced relationships, eschewing involvement in issues where our direct interests are not at stake. We need to build a grand national narrative and project a soft image to enhance our international stature.
The diplomatic space must enhance our foreign policy options, the core elements of foreign policy imperatives remaining constructive engagement, non-interference and advancement of economic cooperation.
Published in The Express Tribune, July 24th, 2014.
Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.
COMMENTS (27)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
"While increased trade and economic linkages with India is necessary, peace is not possible without resolving outstanding disputes, including Kashmir and the water issue."
Good. All Pakistan has to do is to vacate the portion of Kashmir it is occupying. Problem solved.
As for "water issue", Pakistan has to control its runaway population growth and star implementing water conservation polices. The quantum of water that flows from India hasn't changed in six decades.
A well articulated article on Pak foreign policy but much less emphasis has been made on relations with India. The author has named two main criteria namely Kashmir and water issues which can only be discussed but cannot be solved due to rigid stands taken by both countries especially on Kashmir. India is abiding its commitments on water treaty between the two countries which has been acknowledged by several commentators from Pakistan. However, no media house in Pakistan ever discusses the cross-border terrorism issue which is the main hurdle in normalising relations with India. Until the border violations are totally stopped by Pakistan and civilian govt takes control of the foreign policy, peace with India cannot be achieved.
@Sri Varahadev:
The geographic separation of east and west Pakistan may have been a "liability" for the country in the context of the unfortunate events of 1971, but its present geography remains strategically valuable from the perspectives of western countries, China, central Asian countries, and even India. Please refer to Claude Auchinleck's note referred in my response to another respondent above.
Sehgal says "Our nuclear status must be given the same recognition as India’s.". Be it nuclear status, or any status - parity with India is what is sought!
Parity with India may have seemed achievable in the 60s decade of the last century. Now it's just laughable. Parity with Afghanistan is the more realistic scenario. If you want to aspire, try for parity with Bangladesh.
Impressive and a masterpiece written by Mr. Ikram Sehgal. I live in a small house and it's easy to manage despite all the mismanagements happening in real time within it's boundaries and a big house has it's own issues and can't be addressed if they go worse.
Pakistan’s geographical location is a strategic asset rather than a liability, so true yes indeed because Pakistan is easily manageable and like author said "Pakistan is not only a geopolitical bridge from the North to the South, but also a geo-economic corridor connecting the East with the West". Pakistan isn't like India where risk of management cost a fortune to build Pakistan numerous times.
Ikram Sehgal's articles are incisive, frank and meaningful. He writes from the stand point of a Pakistani. The current article presents useful guidelines for those who are concerned with crafting and implementing the foreign policy of the country. Given our current troubles on domestic and international fronts (most of which emanate ironically from our neighborhood namely India and Afghanistan), we need to seriously reset our priorities and pursue a foreign policy similar to one, the broad outlines of which are enumerated in the article. While we seriously need to negotiate with Afghanistan to settle our problems, the negotiations with India need to be conducted with utmost caution given the track record of Indians in reneging the promises made, perpetually conspiring against Pakistan and being relentless in their efforts to get Pakistan categorized as an International pariah. As a matter of fact the Indian mindset manifests itself in the comments by our Indian 'friends' on this article. If they are unwilling to digest the simple fact that Pakistan by virtue of its geography possesses geo-strategic importance what else could one possibly expect from them. Like it or not our country possesses this advantage which is yet to be fully utilized. Pakistan must have good relations with all its neighbours based on mutual respect. I am amazed at the number of Indians venting out their venom on this article which is supposed to be debating Pakistan's foreign policy. Folks it is Pakistan's foreign policy that Ikram Sehgal is debating and not Indian foreign policy which centered around bullying its immediate neighbours so why are you so worked up, eludes common sense. Ikram Sehgal is right in pointing out that without settlement of disputes there can be no meaningful economic collaboration between the two countries, regardless of the number of rounds of talks between the two countries. The trouble is that the Indians want to wish away the disputes or have them resolved to their exclusive advantage in a bid to use the same geo-strategic advantage that Pakistan possesses. Is it possible? In my opinion there has to be something right with this piece due to which it is attracting so much of amateurish Indian Flak or is it that someone has started recruiting some underpaid employees to do his dirty business from across the fence.
So this wishful thinker is a strategist...give me break !
For your information you don't wish or expect. You don't react, you do. Had you learnt anything from 1971 you would know that Bharat is not your friend and never will be.
You should know better than most that Bharat is an existential treat and ever present danger for Pakistan: All thoughts of trade, commerce, business, visa, transit, anything to do with Bharat whatsoever should be abhorrent, even loathsome, for any sane educated Pakistani with a modicum of commonsense.
As for the United States, it has its own agenda: Boost Bharat in the region at all cost. Use Pakistan to do its local 'dirty 'wet work' then dismember it...North Waziristan, followed by South Waziristan, then cut off at Attack. Baluchistan follows.
The attrition of Pakistan society and economy, using its own military is well along the way. Strangulating its economy, its energy supply, at source--hydro, gas, oil--is fundamental to the US plan. Pakistan does not exist, has been erased, on Pentagon's proposed long plan for the region. Pak nukes stand in the way. Groundwork for neutralizing them is well in hand...again using local 'resources'.
In summary: Pakistan must react by reducing US and Bharati presence within, rather than encouraging its expansion and clandestine deployment. Cut its army by half, double its Air force, Navy, and Nuclear Command in the most economical and efficient way possible. ISI must demonstrate its ability in Afghanistan, Kashmir, Khalistan, Assam, Hyderabad...encourage freedom struggles already spawned there.
One demonstration of wisdom and independence would be to commence building KBD, Iran Peace Pipeline to progress without further delay. Defense and economic pact with Iran and exploring its potential with Turkey and formalizing it with China are options too.
Most important: Get educated in the ability, science, and art of negotiating. Learn from the examples of US, Bharat, and Israel. Don't ever give anything away for free...this generous concept of Islam does not work with the non-believer.
Get with it !
As a journalist dealing with regional relations, Ikram Sehgal'a articles always impress me and this is no exception. I can only thank him. My comment though is in response to a comment by "Strategic Asset". Bangladesh is certainly NOT benefitting from any transit agreement with India. The people are vehemently against as are all political scientists and nationalists of the country. Bangladesh will get nothing free... this is a move by India to exploit us as usual. Transit they want free, but we will not be allowed to check their containers being taken to the insurgency-ridden northwest. That spells trouble as anyone living in Bangladesh knows. We bear the brunt of India's moves to quell separationist movements. Our innocent people, young girls, farmers, and general people, are killed with abandon by Indian Border Security Force troops at regular intervals. they are withholding water of common rivers driving us to drought. The ground reality is not as rosy as the writer "Strategic Asset" thinks. That is why I like Ikram Sehgal's write-ups. They are informed, not just something off the top of his head.
Brilliantly articulated! Emphasising the needs to build a better foreign stature for Pakistan. Kudos
This article has made a lot of sense, a sample of Mr. Sehgal's habitual "out-of-the-box" thinking. It is true that Pakistan's geo-strategic positioning is an asset to the country, not a liability and, as suggested in the column, the powers-that-be would do well to take into cognizance the fresh positioning of Russia and China as global powers. They are searching new allies and territories to enhance their circle of support and Pakistan may well cash in on the situation. Strike while the iron is hot! Bangladesh has managed to keep its growth rate on an upward trend despite political unrest, simply because it has been making bridges with China and Russia, not simply looking towards Uncle Sam for sustenance. Another point to note in the article is that Afghanistan can be quite a headache for Pakistan and so any smug idea that it gives atrategic depth, should be dispelled.
I was rather curious about certain comments against this article as they seem to be critical just for the sake of criticizing. I think if one differs, constructive criticism would be more welcome that comments like "How can the US deal with you as a partner, given your duplicitous role dealing with them in Afghanistan?" What a naïve stance! Surely it is common knowledge that, as in politics, there are no permanent friends or enemies... Meet the powers half-way and they'll meet you half way too!
Your premise for foreign relations is based on the flawed premise of religion, especially Sunnis. The Muslim world is central.... And Iran does not enter into your equation. Despite the fact, sophisticated Urdu is nothing but Persian with Hindi verbs. Persians used to come to work and trade up until the end of the Mughal rule. The restoration of trade routes between Kabul to Dhaka (along the Indus - Gangetic plains) are already established and does not seem to be a priority for you. The old Silk-routes (Kabul to Xian or Peshawar to Xian) were always challenging. A traveller in 1988 who followed the Marco Polo route noted that most of Sinkiang province of China, even Northern Areas of Pakistan are not much more different than they were in the times of Marco Polo. Your preferred trade route (Gwadar to China) counts on China investment only. If China finds another source of energy, than pray to Allah. (NB China has signed an agreement with Russian Federation regarding the supply of gas.)
Pakistan seeks to build CPEC from the south to the north to transport energy from the Middle East to sparsely populated and under-developed parts of China, namely Xinjiang and the Tibetan plateau. Pakistanis do not seem to realize that most of the Chinese population lives close to its eastern seaboard and nowhere near Pakistan.
The Central Asian Republics were once parts of the Soviet empire. They are much more closer to the Russians and currently do most of their minuscule trade with Russia and other erstwhile Soviet republics. With the exception of Azerbaijan which is in a different geography altogether, the ones close to Pakistan are mostly run by despots and do not have vast reserves of energy nor the technology or the capital to perform oil & gas exploration.
Pakistan's so-called strategic location is actually that it is situated alongside India, a country with a growing economy and the second most populated country in the world. What this means is that unlike the hinterland of China that it plans to supply to energy to, Pakistan has access to a ready market right next door. Unfortunately Pakistan will do everything but build a good relationship with India and continue on its death spiral to keep its Kashmir pot boiling.
To understand the truth of what I just said, compare Pakistan with Bhutan and Bangladesh. Bhutan also shares a border with China, but it is benefiting enormously from hydro-electric projects that are financed, built and operated by India but for which Bhutan receives royalty revenue. India & Bhutan are now planning 10GW in additional hydro-electric projects. Similarly take Bangladesh where both are working together to execute a transit agreement to build power lines to transport electricity to India's north eastern states for which some 300MW would be provided free to Bangladesh.
The idée fixe of Pakistan’s so called “Strategic Location” is load of bunkum. Pakistani claims of being a gateway to the Central Asian Republics have never explained how this can be so when Pakistan does not share a border with any of the Central Asian Republics. Pakistan mistakes interest of China in Gwadar as seeking a trade and energy corridor to service Xinjiang when China’s principle motivation is to secure markets for Chinese capital good and capital project exporters.
Pakistan also deludes herself by not realising that the role of trade and energy hub to Central Asia and China, if at all such exists, is a role that fits Iran very substantially better than it fits Pakistan from a locational standpoint. Iran does have a border with some Central Asian Republics, is located on the strategic Straits of Hormuz chokepoint and does have a geographic presence outside the Persian Gulf by virtue of the under development port of Chabahar. Besides it has exportable energy, is not a US lackey even of the duplicitous variety and is the sanctions it is currently subject to will one day go away
I disagree with the statement “Pakistan’s geographical location is a strategic asset rather than a liability”. For starters consider 1971 when Pakistan’s “geographic location” in two distinct enclaves separated by some 1,500 kilometers of Indian territory turned out to be a “strategic liability” with India successfully playing mid-wife at the birth of Bangladesh.
An ad hominen piece. The same recycled idiocies: Pakistan's strategic location (hasn't so far prevented the country from going down the tube), trade with India dependent on resolution of Kashmir and "water issues" (obvious this guy doesn't read even the Express Tribune regularly where this matter has been discussed thread-bare), a nuclear treaty for Pakistan similar to the Indo-US nuclear deal. How can the US deal with you as a partner, given your duplicitous role dealing with them in Afghanistan?
I disagree with the statement “Pakistan’s geographical location is a strategic asset rather than a liability”. For starters consider 1971 when Pakistan’s “geographic location” in two distinct enclaves separated by some 1,500 kilometers of Indian territory turned out to be a “strategic liability” with India successfully playing mid-wife at the birth of Bangladesh
The wish list remains the same as has been for years, even though it is divorced from realities for various and obvious reasons. Duplicity and deceit has been responsible for the lack of belief in whatever Pakistan says or promises, without addressing this conundrum progress on any front will be impossible. Telling lies to own citizens may not bother the International community, however the world does not use the same ideological lenses and goes by the facts available and actions visible. Today, we live in a Technological age where the movement of even an ant can be monitored and every private conversation snooped on --- how long can the world be fooled, by anyone for that matter.
Hmmm .. good relations with Saudi ?? Read the following by your own Pakistani paper... http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/opinion/24-Jul-2014/arab-collusion-in-the-israeli-massacre....
Love the author's never say die attitude to come in with the same untruths again and again despite being refuted numerous times.
Let's take at Pakistan and this author's perpetual canard regarding the strategic location of Pakistan. Pakistan is not located in a geo-strategic position such as Panama or Suez in Egypt that would lend itself for canal building. Unlike Iran, Pakistan is not in the right position to affect oil traffic along the Strait of Hormuz. On the other hand, India has control over the Andaman Sea and the mouth of the Strait of Malacca and can easily choke 25% of global trade, however India never brings this up.
Ask the editor why he took it out@shahid:
No mention is made of Iran in this article. Developing and maintaining a working relationship with Iran is absolutely essential if China and Russia are to fill in the economic void being left by a weakened USA in our region
Excellent relations with Saudi Arabia (USA) may provide core strength in the near term, but lack the long term stability of superior relations with our immediate neighbors and neighboring powers.
"..Without energy, we cannot have manufacturing; without manufacturing, economic development is not possible..." A truer words hasn't been spoken before. The brilliant scientist, endorsed by the genius scientist AQ Khan has shown how a way to generate energy from water by demonstrating the water powered cars, so water can solve pakistan's future energy demand, hence the problem comes right back to indian kashmir from where most of the future energy flows (water). Hence the pakistan needs to keep the strategic assets for future energy needs.
...Pakistan’s geographical location is a strategic asset rather than a liability... this mantra had been repeated by pakistan since jinna's pitched it to brits and then USA. If iran signs nuclear deal with international nuclear energy commission and the BIG BOSS USA, chahbar port of iran can become the west's gate away to central asia, thus pakistan's strategic location going down to zero!
Why not with Iran? We share boundary with them, share a lot more socially culturally and historically with them. Without their help the Afghan problem is not going to go away. They are the ones who carry clout with the groups who are anti Talibaan. They can be a massive provider of energy that we need. So why? Why can we not be honest and tell the real stories that give rsie to such statements from our political thinkers?
Nice sentiment but totally ignores reality. You can't solve economic issues when your considered a pariah by the International Community. It's going to take more than rhetoric to convince the World that Pakistan has changed - as far as they are concerned your still the country that aided/abetted OBL, still providing sanctuary to the Haqqani, and otherwise continue to use strategic assets to harm your neighbors. Talks cheap - find/punish those who helped OBL - wipe out the Haqqani rather than talk about attacking them - eliminate the Quetta Shura, close down the Madrassas terror training schools, and while your at it hand over Saeed to India.