Despite the rather stringent fiscal conditions of the US government and its rather troublesome relation with Pakistan, the US has pledged a continuation of assistance to Pakistan. Pro-Pakistan moves like these are bound to be not looked well upon by the US Congress. After all, relations became severely strained after the 2nd May strike that took out Osama Bin Laden. And they got worse when the US military chief went on to call the infamous Haqqani network a “veritable arm of the ISI.”
Yet, the aid is going to have it detractors in Pakistan as well. First of all, the aid is going to be reduced from its quantum of $1.5 billion in 2010 to about $ 1.1 billion in 2011 and is set to remain at this level for the next year, though the exact amount is not yet known. What is really going to peeve off certain quarters is the fact that this is all primarily civilian aid.
To be fair, we need to tone down on our annoyance when it comes to American money. If they want, in this time of great fiscal constraints, performance-based aid for the military, should have nothing to lose. But of key importance is the diplomatic utility of not showing indignation. Since we are not fighting America’s war but one that is in our own interests, pretending the world owes us something when we are helping ourselves is uncalled for.
Pakistan has been the recipient of huge amounts of aid for over a decade. Towards the end of the second Bush term, the Americans were hit by one of their worst financial crises. The bailout plan to deal with these, coupled with an extremely expensive war in Iraq and Afghanistan made all that aid difficult to make. But that was compounded by allegations of Pakistani complicity with the resistance in southern Afghanistan and, in certain cases, Pakistan itself. All criticism of changing American policies (and priorities) should be done keeping all of that in mind.