US's undue pressure on Pakistan

The POST, Sun, January,21, 2007.

Pervaiz Iqbal Cheema

Despite John Negroponte’s undiplomatic and provocative remarks that Pakistan is a major source of Islamic extremism and Al Qaeda leaders enjoy safe hideouts in Pakistan, the Pakistani official response has been appropriate and balanced. Not only the foreign office immediately rejected these allegations but also President Musharraf categorically repeated what he has been constantly stressing that no terrorist would be allowed to take refuge on Pakistani territory and no illegal activity would be permitted on its soil. Responding to CNN the Pakistani Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz also rejected the allegations. Despite the repeated rejection by senior Pakistani leaders the allegations continue to emanate particularly from   American sources.

Not only these allegations have given birth to many questions but have also strengthened the hands of those who are against Pakistan’s current Afghan policy especially its strong stance against Talibans. In addition the Pakistan-US relations are now regularly subjected to biting criticism. Many of these critics attribute Pakistan’s stance against Taliban to American pressures. They are not willing to acknowledge the congruity of objectives among the members of international coalition to combat terrorism.

Currently many questions are raised and all of them deserve comments though it is not possible to respond to all of them in this short piece. While acknowledging Pakistan’s contributions in war against terrorism why allegations against Pakistan are so frequently made now by both the American and Afghan officials? Is the underlying purpose to express their anger over some disagreements or is it meant to placate the domestic public opinion? Are these allegations meant to shift the focus from Karazai’s blunders?  Are these allegations reflective of American inabilities to secure well drummed tall claims?  Is the current American attitude indicative of change in policy pursuits or is it part and parcel of usually employed American policy of stick and carrot?

Already some newspapers are interpreting that Pakistan is passing through a period in which the application of stick in more visible than carrot. For quite sometimes the notion that Pakistan should do more has been drummed from both American and Afghan officials’ sources. In Pakistan many analysts make a comparative analysis of the contributions made by the Americans, the Afghans and the Pakistanis and invariably conclude that neither the American nor the Afghans nor the other partners in the coalition have done as much has been contributed by the Pakistanis. Hence the inevitable question why the Afghans and the Americans not doing enough?

If the Afghan mess is to be sorted out then both the Afghan and American s need to do much more then what they have done so far. The Afghans need to minimize corruption if they are unable to eliminate it altogether, to reduce dependency upon the drug barons and need to  transform its drug based economy, to accelerate work on the developmental projects which could improve job situation, to undertake effective measures in order to improve law and order situation, to improve techniques of police training, to embark upon political approaches wherever they can work especially in the light an English Commander’s successful  employment of such an approach, to expand and accelerate the training program for its army, to avoid undiplomatic and irresponsible utterances, and to cooperate with Pakistan in order to jointly work towards the attainment of peace and stability in Afghanistan etc.

Similarly the Americans need to fully comprehend the difficult and complex situation of Pak-Afghan borderland. They also need to convince NATO to not only contributes more troops but also it should allow the Commander to use all his troops wherever he thinks can best be utilized. They should also refrain from giving irresponsible statements such as the one recently given by Negroponte. They should strengthen the hands of Pakistan and encourage them in their continuous fight against terrorism. They should play their role more innovatively rather then employing meaningless but accusative phrases. They should facilitate the process of intelligence sharing and further strengthen the Tripartite Commission.

However if the American objective is somewhat different then the professed one, namely the stability in Afghanistan, then the contours of adopted policy pursuits seems somewhat understandable. This implies that they do understand that they will not be able to resolve the Afghan situation and hence put the blame upon their most effective partner with a view to enhance their partner’s burden. One interpretation is that the Americans are either planning to leave soon or they are serious to do everything to improve situation in Afghanistan and make Afghan policy a success story before the 2008 elections and in this connection they need Pakistan’s enlarged contributions.

As far as the first objective is concerned and the Americans have made up their mind to get out of Afghan cauldron as soon as possible, then seeking increased help from Pakistan is comprehensible. But then this is no way to seek cooperation. Blame game can only make things difficult for Pakistani government. What they need to realize is that the incumbent government has pursued a policy despite the existence of strong opposition within the country. A vast majority of Pakistanis do not trust the Americans. Not only they believe that the Americans have already let Pakistan down in the past many times (i.e.1962, 1965, 1971, 1990s etc.) but they also predict that the Americans would do it again. The distrust has further widened because of American policies with regard to India and more recently because of extremely partial treatment over the civilian nuclear deal with India.  

Many in Pakistan also believe that the Americans are either visualizing or aiming for a clash between the two Muslim neighbors. Already the Americans have effectively messed up the Iraq situation where the sectarian hydra is plaguing the country. Since the tragic events of 9/11 and the consequent American policies against the Islamic world has already convinced many rational people in the Muslim world that West and more specifically US would like to see Islamic world divided and are injecting seed of discord and infighting wherever it is possible.

Pakistan is a moderate Muslim state and has always been in the forefront to promote peace and stability not just in the region but all around the world. During the last few years Pakistan has been pushing the concept of enlightened moderation. It has regularly contributed towards the UN peacekeeping operations whenever the UN needed such assistance. It has been the most effective actor in the war against terrorism. Yet one finds that more Pakistan does in the war against terrorism, more accusations are hurled against it.

The recent passage of a bill on 12^th Jan.2007 by the House of representative that imposes conditionalities similar to Pressler Amendment is not only likely to put further strains on Pak-US relations but would also strengthen the hands of those opposing government’s Afghan policy. However this does not mean that Pakistan is likely to modify its Afghan policy. Pakistan has repeatedly stressed that it wants to see a stable, peaceful and friendly Afghanistan and has been undertaking policies and actions to attain these often stated objectives. Four factors that are continuously influencing Pakistan’s Afghan policy include Afghanistan is a next door Muslim neighbor, it has large Pakhtoon population living next to Pakhtoon populated provinces of Pakistan, its stability would enable the supply of gas and electricity from Afghanistan’s neighbors like Turkmenistan and Tajikistan, and its traditional economic and commercial interaction with Pakistan.  The American officials need to fully comprehend that the effective cooperation among Afghanistan, Pakistan and US is key element to attain their common objective. Pushing Pakistan is more likely to produce adverse vibes than giving birth to a feasible panacea.

The writer works for Islamabad Policy research Institute.