FB   
 
Powered bysps
        Society for Policy Studies
 
 

 
Whose fault is it anyway?
Posted:Dec 5, 2017
 
Print
Share
  
increase Font size decrease Font size
 
By Mosharraf Zaidi
 
As I write these words, James Mattis is only just approaching Islamabad. But before he has even arrived, we know how this visit will go.
 
Pakistanis and Americans have become cultured in associating low expectations of the bilateral relationship. Mattis’ trip to Pakistan will not be very different from the visits of dozens of senior American officials over the last sixteen years. The Americans will go in and come out of these meetings with a dual edged message: “You’ve done great, but we need you to do more, to help us in Afghanistan”. The Pakistanis will continue to say nothing meaningful or believable, for example: “There is not an inch of Pakistani soil that is available to terrorist groups”.
 
Here in Pakistan, there is a wide swathe within the intelligentsia that is always keen to paint the Americans as overreaching and arrogant, with a comeuppance that is fast approaching. The strategic community in Pakistan has spent decades propagating all kinds of ideas about the state of the world. Yet Pakistan finds itself in a strategic headlock that is asphyxiating its autonomy and sovereignty with every passing minute. Of course, we are told, all of this is the fault of corrupt politicians like Nawaz Sharif – but beyond blaming elected civilians through WhatsApp ‘forwarded as received’ messages and Twitter hashtags like #ModiKaYaar, what is the evidence of the competence of Pakistani strategy?
 
Numerous former generals spend years on the television talk-show circuit evangelising for the imminent demise of the United States. Just recently, a former Pakistani representative at the UN wrote an op-ed that juxtaposed Pakistan with North Korea and Iran, not as a cautionary tale but as a parable about the need to maintain its nuclear options. At defence and security related workshops, conferences and seminars across the country, this kind of aggressive approach to managing Pakistan’s standing in the world is palpable. This is no different from three decades or two decades or even one decade ago, but one massive material difference has emerged today: the China factor.
 
Pakistani strategists have adopted an unquestioning approach to China that reeks of strategic desperation, rather than strategic luxury. The problem with the China-lubricated path to confrontation with the US and its key proxies in our neighbourhood, namely India and Afghanistan, is that China itself has never actually prodded Pakistan to take on the Americans. The reason is simple: nobody can beat them. This isn’t a moral or ethical issue: it is one of pure firepower. Despite all kinds of strategic and tactical provocations, China has maintained both a credible deterrence to American political power, as well as its most important trade relationship. America and China are primary competitors on the global stage, and yet maintain an economic symbiosis that is unprecedented in history.
 
Pakistan’s relationship with China is not a licence for Pakistan to pursue policy paths that lead to international isolation or sanctions. The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor is not now, nor has it ever been, a single-shot instrument to drive economic growth, jobs or prosperity for 210 million Pakistanis. Even if Pakistanis may believe it to be true, there is no evidence that China has ever sold itself to Pakistan as a be-all, end-all saviour. It is not. It has never been. It will never be.
 
Pakistan is a uniquely privileged country in terms of its geographical location. It can leverage this civilisational and existential advantage by virtue of its potential to add value to the actors that have interests in this region or by virtue of its potential to harm those actors and their interests. Pakistan’s strategy thus far seems to be to draw benefits from various actors on the basis of the harm that Pakistan can do to them. There is one key exception to this strategy: China.
 
China has bet on Pakistan because CPEC is a value multiplier, for China and potentially for Pakistan too. But the essential enabling factor in this relationship is China’s proximity to Pakistan, and China’s liquidity as a donor and lender. But even this liquidity is qualified. And Pakistani officials know this well.
 
Consider. When Pakistan needs money, government officials in Pakistan do not fly to Beijing, or Shanghai. They fly to London and New York. The massively successful Sukuk bond issue last week and the World Bank’s continued relevance in this country should serve as pointers about how to manage relations with both China and the US.
 
When push comes to shove, China is still a secondary actor on the global stage as far as finances are concerned. China will happily lend money at favourable terms for concrete deliverables. But it will not underwrite the Pakistani government’s spending habits. Not before. Not now. Not ever.
 
When shove comes to desperate pleas for rescue, it is still the formal financial institutions of the West, primarily tied to the US, that represent sources of funding for Pakistani government’s spending habits.
 
It is a paradox that any halfwit could decode successfully. Pakistan needs China. Pakistan needs America. But both China and America are stronger and more powerful than Pakistan. So job number one is that Pakistan must insure itself against both China and America. Job number two is that Pakistan must try to have the best relations imaginable with both. And job number three? Pakistan must avoid, at all costs, the worsening of relations with either beyond a certain cut-off. Let’s call this cut-off, the HQN/LeT cut-off line.
 
The infinite and unquestioned wisdom of the Pakistani strategist has produced a parade of embarrassments and tragedies. We used ‘tribals’ in 1948, and then throughout the 1980s. But after 9/11 when the Maliks were hunted down and killed by terrorists, we were busy signing peace deals with Nek Mohammad. We loved our Muslim brothers in Bengal to win freedom in 1947, but didn’t love them enough to abide electoral victories to them, or tolerate their language. We loved the Afghans enough to let in five million, and support the Taliban in the 1990s, but abandoned them the moment an American deputy secretary of state threatened to bomb us “back to the stone age”.
 
We love Baloch sardars when they slavishly take the money and shut their mouths, but we bury them in their caves when they try to negotiate. We love Mohajirs as an antidote to the PPP, but not enough to tolerate them when they start walking around in Karachi as if they own the place. We loved Syed Ali Shah Geelani when there was no cable television, but abandoned him for photo-ops in New Delhi. Eventually, it is both possible and probable that Pakistan will do to the HQN and LeT what it did to Fata tribesmen, to Kashmiri separatists, to Baloch sardars, and to the MQM. This is the foundation upon which American hopes for action against the HQN and LeT rest. We can’t blame Mattis or his colleagues for at least trying, can we?
 
Mattis came to a Pakistan where our strategists have produced a political party called the Milli Muslim League as we head into an election year. The idea? That force-feeding Hafiz Saeed and the LeT/JuD to the Pakistani mainstream will soften the blow of eventually rendering them impotent, in terms of their ability to harm Pakistan’s interests – at home or abroad. Even if plausible, the LeT model does not work for the HQN. One way or another, Pakistan needs to develop a coherent and defensible position on the Haqqani Network. The current position is inconsistent with Pakistan’s internal realities, unacceptable to the US, indefensible as far as the Chinese are concerned, and unsustainable at large.
 
This is no way to defend our country, no way to conduct international relations, and no way to prepare for the future. Our complaints should not be directed at James Mattis. They should be directed at the architects of this mess.
 
 
 
 
 
Print
Share
  
increase Font size decrease Font size
 

Disclaimer: South Asia Monitor does not accept responsibility for the views or ideology expressed in any article, signed or unsigned, which appears on its site. What it does accept is responsibility for giving it a chance to appear and enter the public discourse.
Comments (Total Comments 0) Post Comments Post Comment
Review
 
 
 
 
spotlight image Indonesia’s President Joko Widodo has confirmed his presence for the occasion. In an exclusive interview with INDIA REVIEW & ANALYSIS, Indonesia’s Ambassador to India, Sidharto R.Suryodipuro, reminded Nilova Roy Chaudhury that the first Chief Guest for India’s Republic Day celebrations, in 1950, w
 
read-more
spotlight image   The youngest son of Prithviraj Kapoor (1906-1972), died in Mumbai a few days ago. His brothers Raj Kapoor and Shammi Kapoor died earlier. Some of his nephews and nieces continue to be big names in Bollywood.
 
read-more
In a significant boost to New Delhi's Act East Policy, India and Japan set up the Act East Forum on Tuesday as agreed during Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's visit to India this year for the annual bilateral meeting that would help to focus and catalyse development in India's Northeast.
 
read-more
During an awards ceremony honouring six serving and former diplomats and international civil servants for their contributions to world peace and development, the UN was hailed as an institution embodying the Diwali spirit of good overcoming evil. Among those who received the award was Assistant Secretary-General Lakshmi Puri, who is al
 
read-more
This week, the foreign ministers of Russia, India, and China met for their fifteenth ministerial trilateral meeting in New Delhi. Russia was represented by Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, India by External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj, and China by Foreign Minister Wang Yi. In a lengthy joint statement released after the meeting, the
 
read-more
The first thing that one sees when a flight approaches New Delhi is thick smog that envelopes the city and its lack of greenery.  In almost all other major cities of India lack of greenery is the most obvious sight that one sees when approaching it by air.
 
read-more

Pakistan has agreed to allow the rupee to depreciate after holding talks with the International Mone­tary Fund (IMF) on the country's economy.

 
read-more

Two major global changes in the past year; the ‘Brexit’ referendum and the advent of Donald Trump, writes Sandeep Kaur Bhatia

 
read-more

It is also imperative for India to explore other regions for markets. Its trade deficit with Latin America has been narrowing. Also, its trade with Mexico, Colombia and Guatemala has increased, ...

 
read-more
Column-image

Title: A Ticket to Syria; Author: Shirish Thorat; Publisher: Bloomsbury India: Pages: 254; Price: Rs 399

 
Column-image

Gorichen, a majestic peak in the Eastern Himalayas at an altitude of 22,500 feet, is the highest in Arunachal Pradesh. Beautiful to look at and providing a fantastic view from the top, it is extremely tough climb for mountaineers.

 
Column-image

It is often conjectured if the reason for long-standing conflicts and insurgencies, in the developing world, especially South Asia, is not only other powers fishing in troubled waters but also the keenness of arms industries, mostly Western, to...

 
Column-image

Title: The People Next Door -The Curious History of India-Pakistan Relations; Author: T.C.A. Raghavan; Publisher: HarperCollins ; Pages: 361; Price: Rs 699

 
Column-image

Could the North Korean nuclear issue which is giving the world an anxious time due to presence of hotheads on each side, the invasion of Iraq and its toxic fallout, and above all, the arms race in the teeming but impoverished South Asian subcon...